Acanthaceae Fortnight:: Ruellia Sp ?? for ID-NSJ-MAR-29 : …………………….

when was the fbi vol published? …

old i know

much movement in plants and animals since then

no reason why we cant see any of those plants in peninsular India or the Himalayas and gangetic plains , as far as I can see

what with mass movements of people and animals planes ship etc and monsoon currents of the oceans

I wont go with FBI of old publication as gospel truth for at least distributionof plants,  if i were you

I agree with you. FBI is more than century old. But, there are problems, I did search for presence of the species in India. Didn’t find enough info. One site which covers South extensively is silent and refers FoI. Asystasia intrusa Bl. have different leaves in There is another A. intrusa Nees (ref. FBI) of which I do not have any info.
The most important is that this thread doesn’t tell me yet if the posted plant is wild or cultivated.

I have my limitations Didi, I can only search the net retrieve info as much my capacity permits. rest depends upon experts.

not finding much or any info about plants in india in this century or recently is one reason why Dinesh Gargji Satish Phadke et al and some others may be even Neil Soare  joined together to start this google group…

I think there is a thread  or two somewhere about the history of this group, may be DInesh or Satish phadke remembers and can track it..

for many years before that on the net there were pictures by JM Garg if I  searche d for anything related to trees etc in Kolkata or india at the wiki… all those pictures were from OWN WORK JM GARG…
so imaginre my delight when I discovered this group  made by JM

Also with the same objective Tabish and Thingam  started the flowers of India  site

hence the presence though growing and  large now yet in  its infancy
and the professors and folks at BSI and all those botanical gardens in India sit on a treasure trove yet  do not write up show pics etc on the net…
continuing the paucity, making it more pronounced…

Hence we treasure people like Balkar Nidhgan Dr Sabu Ritesh Pankaj and Gurcharanji who are in the academics  studying/teaching  botany and yet give this site so much of their time…

Surajit has raised an important issue…
i quote…

The most important is that this thread doesn’t tell me yet if the posted plant is wild or cultivated.Thank you  Regards  (Surajit) ” end quote


(ps dont mena to capitalize all, just happened, just want the please to be large..)

Yes, Didi, we have so many highest ranks, in this group, dedicated to our flora world.

Yet we have so many mis-identifications which in turns lead to further mis-id.
I prefer to depend on century old lit than to depend on websites, unless those are Govt. or Edu. or related. Even then sites need to be updated regularly which cannot be ascertain only by browsing. Govt., Edu, Org, are all people like us.
What about our eFI, Garg Sir’s project? Majority members do not even bother to maintain author citations. Very few are willing to use statistics. You yourself have raised the issues in several threads.
Do you think this is the way to science?

one thing at a time

this group is to get flowers pictures from all possible site/geographical in india and may even be abroad … in pictures  and id them

statistics etc must be provided by people at BSI whose purview it is to do the research and provide data..

most of us are not botanists  though we /I would love to get citations  and properly identified and acknowledged copyrighted  material… but changes happen slowly.

For definite id … you may be right the century old  books like FBI  may be a solid way to start with , to use as a base, but … but things change, plants change
people change

 look at our own history… we changed from homo erectus to homo sapiens may be???
if someone was taking pictures then and writing FBI like books 100,000 years ago …they would have had a hard time fixing our diagnosis  from old literature about homo erectus .. when they found features of homo sapiens  creeping in…

and neanderthals and ancestors of modern homo sapiens migrating… into areas where they were not supposed to be…

your use and dependence on FBI  is something like that … often confusion esp in sites or presence// absence that you raise … may be FBI is  best for the description of the species they identified then… but their incidence and presence or absence of XY or Z  does not mean anything to me… it only means that they did not see any XY or Z then or nobody reported them then or they (XY or Z)  really migrated to present positions  in recent times…

and that just as we as a group have our own limitations, the FBI guys had their own limitations…

I hope I have explained my position

And Gurcharanji raisies issues of mis-id  even with plant list people etc look up some old thread   where he has talked of that, may be it was before you joined

be well

I also have my own threads, several, where Gurcharan Sir discussed the TPL issue.
Yes, species identified in FBI, across families, later have been corrected many a times. Recently we saw that in solanaceae fortnight.
I know one can’t depend much on old, outdated things. I know it gives the basic.
When I try to ID a plant I search for available labelled/identified images. The problem arises when I find very similar looking images having different ID tags. The matter complicates when I find the identification had been made/suggested/done by our veteran respected seniors, senior means I am telling about membership, in this group.
In that case I can only provide what I find in present days’ internet, and also in century old lit. I only copy what I find. Just as I copied in this thread “But, as per FBI A. intrusa Blume is distributed in Singapore, Java”. In the following mail I only stated – “But, there are problems, I did search for presence of the species in India. Didn’t find enough info. One site which covers South extensively is silent and refers FoIAsystasia intrusa Bl. have different leaves in There is another A. intrusa Nees (ref. FBI) of which I do not have any info.”

I do not think I did anything wrong to state the above.

No you definitely did not do any thing wrong,

did i say that?

your reporting is just that .. honest mirroring of what you find

why would any one say that’s wrong? why would I ?

i only pointed out that too much reliance on the net (which is in its infancy yet, the information is still not very mature and too many egos involve across the oceans that many things donot get resolved…) or the old old literature is to be taken with some idea that things change…

I belong to a way of thinking … that if a disease  has not been described fully , at least it falls between the cracks where it has no feature 100 percent falling in place with hitherto described pathology… may be we are dealing whit something new or variant or …
and lets name it ourselves and let the stuff fall where it may … after a few more examples // cases // patients and reporting it may find a place in newer order of things…  and a newer classification would be written…


may be your questioning these Ayastasia falls in that category… who knows…

so relax

lets see what develops in next couple of years… now that many many people have digital cameras and there are forums like ours …many more  in smaller way… there may be a resolution of your question yet…

and it only a weedy flower…  so dont loose your peace over it

its not earth shaking anticancer or anti parkinson’s  or anti polio drug discovery or a new regulatory T cells that can save the transplanted kidney or the heart from rejection… tight id control and criteria are needed there … not in some weed…
enough already

I am relaxed Didi, I only object to your view over my dependence on old lit. I agree old is old,,,,, I agree net is half truth, but what can I do? If I had other flora I would had refer that. If I had BSI I would had dumped all old lit. Our group is not able to even provide some simple info. Yet I am spending hours to find zero-error ID of certain complicated taxa across genera. So little resources, so little info on uploaded plant, so complicated and jumbled up info in net & lit …. yet I am trying continuously to prove that only my suggestion is correct! I am angry with myself Didi, none other. Sometimes I think now enough is enough, this is not the proper way, nothing can be done this way, unnecessarily giving birth to misunderstanding, arguments, hurting ego…etc.

Yes, let it be Asystasia complex only.

That’s the spirit, Surajit

yes lets put it as Ayastasia complex, and be done with it, in the meantime I have written to Narandra ji

may be my earlier message was not prominent

lets see