.
Images by Urvashi Thakur (1-ID by Nidhan Singh), Prashant (2,3) and Nidhan Singh (4)

/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_2715-6.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_2716-6.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-2-.JPG

 


.

VoF Week : Codonopsis rotundifolia:

Codonopsis rotundifolia (Roundleaf Bellflower)

Place : Valley of Flower

Date : 14.08.2012



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/P8140292.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/P8140293.JPG
VoF Week : Codonopsis rotundifolia:  Name of species : Codonopsis rotundifolia
Family : Campanulaceae
Habit : Climber
Habitat : Hill slope, open forest
Date of click : 14th Aug`12
Location: Valley of Flowers National Park, Uttarakhand .
Abundance : Single sighting.


/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ej2Y2oG9_MHWgIDE2dAC1f1GwXWdG-udE1p0a2muCwhe6i768pxuQ6oFlZSEaLlp7eFSOOZNfFhPv75tbAdDEP3imfuY-PPdhGJ6miexZlIO-w5000-h5000.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/kDtQW6c4xX-Qz1WtDKwv9G4mC47STTMbfdbepBUtwTO8Y0Nj76-vYsAyu0jUph5XtTRTI_H6vBIYT0fJWyiO8i682H-8F2msJmRBxrTfTafR-w5000-h5000.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/rkJKfYRu7KykBxPMhp_ZlTkpnkrUYtz59dmYH0k-AHoeMPU6i_RdCTef1H0nnuu2pZCovDszHVotxDBrE-24X45T7S815r8fDUYRrVVDxvCQ-w5000-h5000.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/d3VCEsRcFPc38A_1N-01LBUy_Mim4W4Fd2MPURKLGAoi1T3yzu3q_k_uVjJ27BIIHX5EYAFFQ9SaZ-bBc99YeFIIyRYTu1reIzp1yvqtiWVa-w5000-h5000.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/25ZZoN_1-8SiAFvs0G5UHyWjl8ryDkf2RViLjmj7daufIhtytswUDJQ-GASpUGJLyr53siLfjOX6jv92T_tKIjFGmChR4EOtst_roMaH5tLI-w5000-h5000.jpg

VoF Week :: Codonopsis rotundifolia at Valley of Flowers: Codonopsis rotundifolia Benth. … (family: Campanulaceae)

2 AUG 12
Valley of Flowersabout 11000 – 12000 ft


.


VoF Week: Codonopsis – ID Please:  Thre are 6 petals in this flower and little pointed. Is it Codonopsis sp?


Codonopsis rotundifolia

http://www.flowersofindia.net/catalog/slides/Roundleaf%20Bellflower.html


.


Codonopsis rotundifolia:

Sharing pic of Codonopsis rotundifolia Beth.

Family : Companulaceae



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_0697.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_0696.jpg

VOF Week 310812_DS_01:  No doubt , I am posting all my collections from VOF August’12 for identification. Please id this one for me


Codonopsis rotundifolia Benth. (family Campanulaceae).



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_2994-8.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_4372.jpg
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IMG_4373-3.jpg

VOF Week: Codonopsis rotundifolia at VoF:  Codonopsis rotundifolia (Family: Campanulaceae ) at VoF.


Very beautiful display



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-3-.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-4-.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-2--1.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-5-.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-1--5.JPG

VoF Week: Codonopsis rotundifolia from Valley: Codonopsis rotundifolia from Valley



https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-KEtPQIQh4BY/U2CpQVtbIQI/AAAAAAAAASA/OpNl8uD1BJ4/s1600/DSC07509.JPG
id please..picture from Valley of Flowers : 3 posts by 3 authors. 1 image.

Codonopsis rotundifolia..



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/DSC09621-8-6.JPG

Codonopsis rotundifolia  

Roundleaf bellflowerValley of flowers – Uttarakhand

August 2010


Excellent click



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-4--8.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-3--6.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia.JPG
/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20-1-.JPG

I am sharing these pics recorded from Valley of Flowers..
Codonopsis rotundifolia


Beautiful photographs of Codonopsis rotundifolia


Yes a common climber in mid valley, climbing over other herbs. Flowers are beautifully captured.



Codonopsis rotundifolia (Family: Campanulaceae) at VoF.


Very nice..



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20rotundifolia%20Chor-%20%20Himachal%20Pradesh-%203200m%20-Krishan%20Lal-.JPG

Fwd: Codonopsis rotundifolia in H.P. : 1 post by 1 author. Attachments (1)

Nice shot by Krishan Lal taken at 3200m on the Chor, H.P.
Flowers of Himalaya reports this from shrubberies @ 1800-3600m
from Pakistan to Central Nepal.
Stewart recorded this in Kashmir @ 2-3000m.
Not mentioned in Flora Simlensis.
My team found this during the 1983 Kashmir Botanical Expedition.
‘Plants of Gulmarg’ record this from Farozpar Nullah.

Flora Lahaul-Spiti found this to be frequent along the borders of cultivated fields at Trilokinath.



Codonopsis viridis from GHNP, Dist. Kullu…. alt. 3000 m asl.


Close to images at Codonopsis rotundifolia Benth. rather than those at Codonopsis viridis Wall.  



 

/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Plant5%20I%20IMG_4311.jpg/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Plant5%20I2%20IMG_4310.jpg

Flora of Uttarakhand- Plant5 for Id- JM : 4 posts by 4 authors. Attachments (4)

Wild Herb captured on 13/8/10 during the trek from Ghangaria (around 11,000 ft.) to Hemkunt Sahib (around 14000 ft.).

Guess this to be fruiting Codonopsis viridian.


Is it in fruiting stage/


Yes, it could be Codonopsis viridis


Close to images at Codonopsis rotundifolia Benth. rather than those at Codonopsis viridis Wall.  


Corolla seems to have fallen off.


Yes, fruiting stage.


Yes, your images are of immature capsules of a Codonopsis.  However, it is always much more difficult to identify with confidence on the
basis of even 4 images – nice though they may well be and in sharp focus (which is important).  Whilst it is possible to do this, especially for distinctive examples, particularly if those specialists familiar with a genus or regional flora are available to inspect them but otherwise, it can be difficult, at best, time consuming, often impossible to arrive at a determination one can have confidence in. Many more images are needed including close-up detail of floral parts (not available on this occasion) and foliage – it would have been helpful to have close-ups of both upper and lower surfaces of leaves incl. both upper and lower leaves if there was any difference, edge of leaves and shape of base etc.. In the past, definite identification took place by comparison of dried, pressed specimens of each plant with reference specimens stored in cabinets in herbaria.  The reliability of the resultant identifications depends upon the quality of both the freshly collected specimen and reference ones found in any herbarium plus the availability of taxonomists with specialist knowledge of ‘difficult’ genera.  The poorer, scrappier the specimens, the hardier the process is.
Nowadays, if one is to substitute photos for specimens (as few people are now permitted to gather pressed specimens these days), each time someone photographs a plant, they need to be taking many more images if they are to seek a reliable identification – with today’s digital cameras, it costs practically nothing to take as many images as one likes.  Nowadays, I typically take 20-30 images per plant.  Once one gets into the habit of doing this, it does not take that long!  For further information of what should be done, see: https://sites.google.com/a/shpa.org.uk/fowh/; whilst https://sites.google.com/a/shpa.org.uk/fowh/impatiens-1 provides an example of the detail which a modest digital camera can produce for Impatiens glandulifera; I have only just started my ‘Flowers of the North-West Himalaya – a virtual guide..’ so have yet to cover Codonopsis.
There is a widespread and long-standing belief  (both in India and the West) that one can take just one or two images (when I began serious botanizing in the 1980s, this was the most one could afford and even with a quality macro-lens and tripod one did not obtain comparable close-ups to those one can readily take, with some practise using today’s digital cameras) and rapidly ‘match’ them with one or two images in a book or on the internet (I advise eFI members that a significant proportion of the images one finds by typing a species name into a search engine have been misidentified).
I must emphasise that this ‘belief’ is incorrect and should be challenged. The reason for this is that ‘nice’ though the photographs may or may not be, they often do not show sufficient close-up detail, indeed on many occasions do not reveal the diagnostic characteristics.  Plant identifications which can be relied upon, have traditionally and largely remain, based upon characteristics which can be observed on dried pressed specimens in herbaria – at times examination using hand lenses (@ x10 magnification or higher), binocular microscopes (@ x20-40 magnification or even greater scrutiny are required, not features seen on fresh plants in the wild with the naked eye or non-close-up photos.  So IF we are to largely replace herbarium specimens, it is essential that plant photographers take the time and effort to record each specimen they come across in depth, with many more images. But it is not simply a question of the number of images but their quality and which characteristics they illustrate!  As always, the emphasis be QUALITY rather than QUANTITY.
Now let us consider the images taken during a trek between 3300-4200m in Uttarakhand with the identification of Codonopsis viridis.  It is certainly a Codonopsis which is quite a distinctive genus but it is not always possible to readily distinguish between the species, so if one does not have close-ups of different floral parts and/or foliage, this becomes more challenging. On this occasion one does have in focus close-ups of calyces.  Leaving aside the morphological features, the geographic location, elevation found and habitat must be taken into consideration before suggesting an identification – frequently, this does happen in postings. According to ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ (please note this is not a flora but merely a brief guide to common and showier species which only covers a fraction of the total flora – and is now 30+ years out-of-date in terms of nomenclature and taxonomic treatments) C.viridis has never been recorded from Himachal Pradesh, its known upper altitudinal limit being 2700m – at least 600m lower than where it was photographed – an approximate elevation was not given, so it might have been photographed much higher..  Whilst extensions to geographic and altitudinal ranges do occur, in most cases they are unlikely, so one should examine images more closely and re-think which species one thinks it might be. On the basis of likely elevation, it would be very surprising for this to be the correct species.
A quick look at the small photo of C.viridis in ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ and the brief description, clearly do not match the above images. The features of its calyx-lobes are markedly different – they are not linear. As its capsules are immature, it is difficult to be certain about shape when mature.
Based upon the images and known information, they are in fact close to Codonopsis rotundifolia Benth. – NOT C.viridis The former species, according to ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ has been recorded from Pakistan to Central Nepal @ 1800-3600m – which fits.
I have a copy of Smythe’s ‘Valley of Flowers’ – the only Codonopsis it mentions is C.rotundifolia, which was described in both a moist situation amongst rocks and here and there Geum also creeping and twining itself about the stalks of larger flowers. One would not expect C.viridis to be found during this trek, as it is well above any previously known records, between 600-1500m higher, which is quite a difference. The highest record for C.rotundifolia is 3600m, according to ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’.
PLEASE, on future occasions, adopt my approach (you are in an ideal position to set an example for others to follow) of taking 20-30 images per plant (from which, dependent upon the species, perhaps 10-12 can be posted onto eFI to cover the important parts – it would be helpful if, for every genus, especially those which are difficult to identify, members are told which ‘bits’ are especially important, at times, essential to photograph; they may not be the prettiest but are the most important).  IT IS NOT THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES ON EFI THAT MATTERS BUT THEIR QUALITY ALONG WITH THE RELIABILITY OF THE IDENTIFICATIONS.  If data-bases, whether on-line or in ‘floras’ are littered with misidentifications along with out-of-date nomenclature and taxonomic treatment, these do not help clarify/improve the situation but ADD to the muddle and confusion.
In the UK we are fortunate to have the BSBI – Botanical Society of Britain & Ireland, which has long combined the outstanding efforts of both professional botanists and amateur ones (i.e. those who are not employed as a botanist) – the so-called amateurs are often of professional standard.  Even in Britain, amateurs make a vital contribution to the study of our flora.  Members of eFI, no matter what their age or background, with an interest in plants, are in a position to TRANSFORM the study of Indian flora – through quality plant photography using digital cameras (the more expensive top end of the range are not require, indeed for most people are not suitable to use).  But they need to explore further into the countryside – whether mountainous or not and take MANY MORE, CLOSE-UP IMAGES, IN GOOD FOCUS (along with shots of habitat).  If anyone does not know what to do, consult my FLOWERS OF THE NORTH-WEST HIMALAYA digital flora, see: https://sites.google.com/a/shpa.org.uk/fowh/  – whilst I specialise in Himalayan plants, my comments apply world-wide.
Do take advantage of this opportunity to help study Indian plants in greater detail.  This example shows the importance of being able to recognise species in the autumn months/fruiting stages.  Not forgetting c. location, altitude, habitat.
I have just checked /species/a—l/c/campanulaceae/codonopsis and find the same two images already there, named as Condopsis rotundifolia!  I am confused as to why, seemingly, these images have been submitted again?
UNFORTUNATELY, I NOTE I MADE A SIMILAR PLEA FOR MORE IMAGES TO BE TAKEN PER PLANT PHOTOGRAPHED BACK IN FEBRUARY WHEN POSTING IMAGES OF THE CORRECT CODONOPSIS OVATA.
Seems what I am urging is mostly falling on deaf ears.  It clearly needs the active support of senior figures within eFI……….

I enjoyed viewing your pretty pictures, in good focus.  However, it is always much more difficult to identify with confidence on the
basis of only 1 or 2 images – nice though they may well be and in sharp focus (which is important).  Whilst it is possible to do this, especially for distinctive examples,particularly if those specialists familiar with a genus or regional flora are available to inspect them but otherwise, it can be difficult, at best, time consuming, often impossible to arrive at a determination one can have confidence in. Many more images are needed including close-up detail of floral parts and foliage. In the past, definite identification took place by comparison of dried, pressed specimens of each plant with reference specimens stored in cabinets in herbaria.  The reliability of the resultant identifications depends upon the quality of both the freshly collected specimen and reference ones found in any herbarium plus the availability of taxonomists with specialist knowledge of ‘difficult’ genera.  The poorer, scrappier the specimens, the hardier the process is.
Nowadays, if one is to substitute photos for specimens (as few people are now permitted to gather pressed specimens these days), each time someone photographs a plant, they need to be taking many more images if they are to seek a reliable identification – with today’s digital cameras, it costs practically nothing to take as many images as one likes.  Nowadays, I typically take 20-30 images per plant.  Once one gets into the habit of doing this, it does not take that long!  For further information of what should be done, see: https://sites.google.com/a/shpa.org.uk/fowh/; whilst https://sites.google.com/a/shpa.org.uk/fowh/impatiens-1 provides an example of the detail which a modest digital camera can produce for Impatiens glandulifera; I have only just started my ‘Flowers of the North-West Himalaya – a virtual guide..’ so have yet to cover Codonopsis.
There is a widespread and long-standing belief  (both in India and the West) that one can take just one or two images (when I began serious botanizing in the 1980s, this was the most one could afford and even with a quality macro-lens and tripod one did not obtain comparable close-ups to those one can readily take, with some practise using today’s digital cameras) and rapidly ‘match’ them with one or two images in a book or on the internet (I advise eFI members that a significant proportion of the images one finds by typing a species name into a search engine have been misidentified).
I must emphasise that this ‘belief’ is incorrect and should be challenged.  The reason for this is that ‘nice’ though the photographs may or may not be, they often do not show sufficient close-up detail, indeed on many occasions do not reveal the diagnostic characteristics.  Plant identifications which can be relied upon, have traditionally and largely remain, based upon characteristics which can be observed on dried pressed specimens in herbaria – at times examination using hand lenses (@ x10 magnification or higher), binocular microscopes (@ x20-40 magnification or even greater scrutiny are required, not features seen on fresh plants in the wild with the naked eye or non-close-up photos.  So IF we are to largely replace herbarium specimens, it is essential that plant photographers take the time and effort to record each specimen they come across in depth, with many more images. But it is not simply a question of the number of images but their quality and which characteristics they illustrate!  As always, the emphasis be QUALITY rather than QUALITY.
Now let us consider the images taken at c. 3000m in the GHNP, Kulu, H.P. with the identification of Codonopsis viridis.  It is certainly a Codonopsis which is quite a distinctive genus but it is not always possible to readily distinguish between the species, so if one does not have close-ups of different floral parts and/or foliage, this becomes more challenging.  Leaving aside the morphological features, the geographic location, elevation found and habitat must be taken into consideration before suggesting an identification – frequently, this does happen in postings..  According to ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ (please note this is not a flora but merely a brief guide to common and showier species which only covers a fraction of the total flora – and is now 30+ years out-of-date in terms of nomenclature and taxonomic treatments) C.viridis has never been recorded from Himachal Pradesh, its known upper altitudinal limit being 2700m – 300m lower than where it was photographed.  Whilst extensions to geographic and altitudinal ranges do occur, in most cases they are unlikely, so one should examine images more closely and re-think which species one thinks it might be.
A quick look at the small photo of C.viridis in ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ and the brief description, clearly do not match the above images.  The features of its corolla and calyx-lobes are markedly different.
Based upon the two images and known information, they are indeed close to Codonopsis rotundifolia Benth. as … suggests.  This species, according to ‘Flowers of the Himalaya’ has been recorded from Pakistan to Central Nepal @ 1800-3600m.
PLEASE, on future occasions, adopt my approach (you are in an ideal position to set an example for others to follow) of taking 20-30 images per plant (from which, dependent upon the species, perhaps 10-12 can be posted onto eFI to cover the important parts – it would be helpful if, for every genus, especially those which are difficult to identify, members are told which ‘bits’ are especially important, at times, essential to photograph; they may not be the prettiest but are the most important).  IT IS NOT THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES ON EFI THAT MATTERS BUT THEIR QUALITY ALONG WITH THE RELIABILITY OF THE IDENTIFICATIONS.  If data-bases, whether on-line or in ‘floras’ are littered with misidentifications along with out-of-date nomenclature and taxonomic treatment, these do not help clarify/improve the situation but ADD to the muddle and confusion.
In the UK we are fortunate to have the BSBI – Botanical Society of Britain & Ireland, which has long combined the outstanding efforts of both professional botanists and amateur ones (i.e. those who are not employed as a botanist) – the so-called amateurs are often of professional standard.  Even in Britain, amateurs make a vital contribution to the study of our flora.  Members of eFI, no matter what their age or background, with an interest in plants, are in a position to TRANSFORM the study of Indian flora – through quality plant photography using digital cameras (the more expensive top end of the range are not require, indeed for most people are not suitable to use).  But they need to explore further into the countryside – whether mountainous or not and take MANY MORE, CLOSE-UP IMAGES, IN GOOD FOCUS (along with shots of habitat).  If anyone does not know what to do, consult my FLOWERS OF THE NORTH-WEST HIMALAYA digital flora, see: https://sites.google.com/a/shpa.org.uk/fowh/  – whilst I specialise in Himalayan plants, my comments apply world-wide.
Do take advantage of this opportunity to help study Indian plants in greater detail.
I have just checked /species/a—l/c/campanulaceae/codonopsis and find the same two images already there, named as
Condopsis rotundifolia!  I am confused as to why, seemingly, these images have been submitted again?
UNFORTUNATELY, I NOTE I MADE A SIMILAR PLEA FOR MORE IMAGES TO BE TAKEN PER PLANT PHOTOGRAPHED BACK IN FEBRUARY WHEN POSTING IMAGES OF THE CORRECT  CODONOPSIS OVATA.

Seems what I am urging is mostly falling on deaf ears.  It clearly needs the active support of senior figures within eFI……….



/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20affinis.JPG

Codonopsis sp. from Paddar valley J&K.:

Can this plant be:
Family: Campanulaceae
Location: Paddar valley J&K
Altitude: 2700 meters asl


describe some of the morphological characteristics it will be helpful to you.


Same as esarlier  I guess!

I guess this should be Codonopsis viridis Wall.


Codonopsis rotundifolia


I think yes C. rotundifolia, twinning habit and shape of calyx.


/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20-2-.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis.JPG/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Codonopsis%20-3-.JPG
Campanulaceae & Gentianaceae Week: Campanulaceae

Kindly Identify this Codonopsis species
Location: Paddar valley J&K
Altitude: 2500 meters asl
Date: 1st August 2011


You should always write a few things that should help in identification: Erect plant or climbing, size of flowers; shape and size of flowers if they are not visible in the photograph.

I think this should be Codonopsis clematidea


Thanks a lot Sir. I will try my best in future


This looks different from Codonopsis clematidea at another thread & at FOI – Clematis Bonnet Bellflower


I guess this should be Codonopsis viridis Wall.


Codonopsis rotundifolia


I think yes C. rotundifolia, twinning habit and shape of calyx.



.

References:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *