I want to know about the precise type locality in India. A person is telling in his lectures that the said species was described based on collection from Great Banyan tree growing in Indian Botanic Garden, Howrah, India. I have seen the protologue but unable to make out so. Kindly let me know.
Thanks.
Tapas Sir question is interesting - Rheede visited Bengal or not.
Hendrik Adriaan van Rheede tot Drakenstein served as a governor of Dutch Malabar region between 1669 and 1676. Technically author of Hortus Indicus Malabaricus is Rheede, but many contributors are associated, Indian workers - Appu Bhat, Itti Achuden, Ranga Bhat, Vinayaka Pandit, King of Cochin and many more. Foreign workers - Arnold Seyn, Joannes Commelinus, Johannes Munnicks, Paul Hermann, Theodore Jansson van Almeloveen and many more.
As mentioned in Hortus Indicus Malabaricus (1678-1693), the plants are from Malabar region which at that referred to Western Ghats area of Goa to Kanyakumari (means Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu).
Ficus benghalensis type specimen/s may be collected from Western Ghats region at that time, because this species is commonly found almost throughout India from long back as mentioned in our old classical literature or from Bengal region by some anonymous collector as per species epithet, which was handed over to Rheede and then to Commelin.
Type locality is India, locality in India we cannot say, but may be Western Ghats region or Bengal.
This statement by the said lecturer is enough for me to laugh for the rest of my life!
Well, you already have 4 recommendations.
Dear Subir,
I am not a Ficus specialist, but a short literature search shows that Ficus benghalensis L. was lectotypified by D. O. Wijnands in "The Botany of the Commelins" , page 153, as being Commelin's Plate n° 62. He indicates that Commelin received his plant from Reede who sent it from "Bengale". No more precision.
It is difficult to say that type locality is Botanical Garden Howrah...but based on specific epithet we can say it has to be collected from Bengal........
P. Meerts is correct, Type locality India, Bengal.
but not so precise that we can say IBG, founded in 1786.
D. O. Wijnands in The Botany of the Commelins (1983) designated Commelin's Plate 62 as the lectotype of Ficus benghalensis L. Commelin received his plants from Rheede, who sent them from 'Bengal'. Rheede visited Bengal in 1686.
However, for popular lectures, the attached photograph may be projected as the holotype as the students at the graduate level will never raise any question!
Students should always be given the correct information because they will spread the information to others.
If I am myself not knowing the correct information/answer, then how I will pass it on to the students?
Tapas Sir question is interesting - Rheede visited Bengal or not.
Hendrik Adriaan van Rheede tot Drakenstein served as a governor of Dutch Malabar region between 1669 and 1676. Technically author of Hortus Indicus Malabaricus is Rheede, but many contributors are associated, Indian workers - Appu Bhat, Itti Achuden, Ranga Bhat, Vinayaka Pandit, King of Cochin and many more. Foreign workers - Arnold Seyn, Joannes Commelinus, Johannes Munnicks, Paul Hermann, Theodore Jansson van Almeloveen and many more.
As mentioned in Hortus Indicus Malabaricus (1678-1693), the plants are from Malabar region which at that referred to Western Ghats area of Goa to Kanyakumari (means Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu).
Ficus benghalensis type specimen/s may be collected from Western Ghats region at that time, because this species is commonly found almost throughout India from long back as mentioned in our old classical literature or from Bengal region by some anonymous collector as per species epithet, which was handed over to Rheede and then to Commelin.
Type locality is India, locality in India we cannot say, but may be Western Ghats region or Bengal.
@Rajeev, the Banyan tree was one of the first tropical plants known to Europe. As per my knowledge, it was described by Theophrastus based on reports from Alexander's invasion of India (326-325 BC). There are possibly no specimens of the references cited in the protologue (Sp. Pl. 2: 1059. 1753) except van Royen's sheet containing one leaf. In case Rheede had not visited bengal, then the epithet benghalensis is a misnomer but the same was derived by Linnaeus from Commelin.
Correct Sir, Presently , there are no specimens of the references cited in the protologue (Sp. Pl. 2: 1059. 1753) except van Royen's sheet containing one leaf.
I am saying about the specimen/s which was/were not extant now, but on the basis of which Commelin drawn his Illustration (lectotype of F. benghalensis, Hort. Med. Amstelod. Pl. Rar., 1: 119, t. 62. 1697 ).
One more interesting thing is that Commelin cited "Pipal" as common name for F. benghalensis, but in India the common name Pipal is used for F. religiosa.
Still we need work on, why Linnaeus used species epithet benghalensis for - Banisteria benghalensis, Commelina benghalensis, Vicia benghalensis.
For Banisteria benghalensis Habitat in Indiis, Commelina benghalensis Habitat in Benghala, Vicia benghalensis Habitat in Benghala. At that time Linnaeus has seen specimens from Bengal ? or author of illustration cited in synonymy might have seen.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Asia
- India