Cynoglossum anchusoides Lindl., Edwards’s Bot. Reg. 28: t. 14 1842. (syn: Adelocaryum anchusoides (Lindl.) Brand; Cynoglossum emodi Schouw; Cynoglossum macranthum Regel & Smirnow; Cynoglossum macropterum Borszcz. ex Trautv.; Cynoglossum macrostylum Bunge; Lindelofia anchusoides (Lindl.) Lehm.; Lindelofia anchusoides subsp. macrostyla (Bunge) R. Kam.; Lindelofia cynoglossoides A. Brand; Lindelofia macrostyla (Bunge) Popov; Mattiastrum howardii Kazmi; Paracaryum anchusoides (Lindl.) Benth. & Hook. fil.; Paracaryum heliocarpum Kern.);
Afghanistan, C-Asia (Pamir-Alai, Tianshan), Pakistan (Kurram, Hazara, Chitral,
Sind, Swat), Pakistani Kashmir (Astor, Gilgit, Baltistan), Jammu & Kashmir
(Dras, Zanskar, Kashmir) as per Catalogue of Life;
Fwd: Lindelofia macrostyla : 3 posts by 2 authors. Attachments (4)
I attach 4 images scanned in from slides taken in Ladakh in the 1980s of Lindelofia macrostyla which L. achusoides as I knew it, has been changed to.
My team collected this at Panichar, Suru Valley during the University of Southampton Ladakh Expedition 1980. 3300m, steep, E-facing slope, moist loam, grasses and umbellifers (now Apiaceae family) with Hippophae rhamnoides susbp. turkestanica, petals blue, pale mauve-pin flower-buds, to 60cm.
Whilst members of the University of Southampton Zanskar Expedition in 1981 found it at abundant at 3350m in dry sandy soil in valley bottom.
Flowers of Himalaya describe this (which they knew as L.anchusoides) as common in Lahul and Ladakh on stony slopes & 2100-3600m from Afghanistan to Himachal Pradesh.
Stewart (who knew it as L.anchusoides) recorded it as common from N.Pakistan, Kashmir & Ladakh @ 1500-4000m.
Flora of Lahaul-Spiti record this (as L.anchusoides) as common on dry, sandy slopes at Jispa.
Dickore & Klimes in their checklist of Ladakh plants (2005) also knew it as L.anchusoides, so the change to L.macrostyla must be recent.
Thanks for letting me know this has been transferred to Cynoglossum.
Thanks for letting me know the LATEST name change of this plant!
The IDENTIFICATION is correct – we are talking about the same plant.
Isn’t it about time THEY decided it belonged to a different family rather than Boraginaceae……
Strictly-speaking one needs to check the species, genus and family EVERY time!!
I have MUCH sympathy for non-botanists as at times I get fed-up with the changes…