sign in sign up
<<
Home , Sitapur, Sitapur district

STUDIES ON FLORA OF

DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF f^mtt of S^WnityphP IN BOTANY

BY MOHAMMAD BADRUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI

DEPARTMENT OF BOTANY MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH () 1986 " W^

•- ^ -t^ ••'' V ic'* J««'

DS1128 IM JTHS NAME OF

COMPASSlONATS & MERCIFUL

ALLAH DEDICATED TO

M y

PARENTS Department of Botany ATigarh Muslim university ALIGARH - 202 001 NOV. 1986

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the dissertation entitled "STUDIES ON FLORA OF SITAPUR" siibmitted to the Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY/ is a bonafide work carried out by Mr. Mohammad Badruzzaman Siddiqui. No part of the disser­ tation has been published or submitted for any other degree or diploma so far.

(WAZAHAT HUSAIN) Reader ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

All the thanks are due to almighty Allah, who bestov/ed upon me the capabilities necessary to achieve this targed,

I dean pleasure in expressing debt of gratitude to my supervisor Dr. '.Vazahat Husain, Reader in Botany, Aligarh Muslim university, Aligarh for his generous help and skilful guidance during the course of preparation of this dissertation.

I also submit my humble regards and sincere thanks to my all family members, brothers, sisters and particularly my parents, deserve a special mention since they made me curious about the greer world and gave every possible encouragement during this v^ork.

I am also thankful to Chairman Botany Department, Muslim University, Aligarh for providing laboratory and other facilities. I am also thankful to Mr, Mohammad Akhtar, whose friendly cooperation has made the completion of this dissertation possible. My sincere thanks are also due to M/S Pazal, Ashraf, Zaki, Samiullah, Mabood, Mujeeb, Haroon, Shamshad and other friends for their multiferous cooperation and assistance.

My special thanks are also due to my brother-in-laws Mr. Shafique Ahmad & Zakiullah whose valuable suggestions encouraged me most.

(MOHAMT-IAD BADRUZZAMAN SlDDIQUl) CONTENTS

Page r.o.

Introduction 1-6

Review of the literature 7 - IS

Plan of work 17 - 33

References . 3 9 - 51 1 INTRODUCTION

For a big coiintry like India, with such a varied phytogeographical regions, there are not many floras. The most important among these is the. ."Flora of British India" by Sir J.D. Hooker. Hooker was conscious of many omission in his flora and rightly remarked that "a work of such a scope neither fulness nor completeness are attainable".

In the northern part of our country, «J.F, Duthie wrote the flora of Upper Gangetic Plain. Duthie had taken the whole upper Gangetic Plain which really a vast area and as such one cannot be sure to attain the completeness of the floristic v7ork. Generally speaking, local floras are much more valuable than those for bigger areas because the explora­ tion of vegetation can be carried out intensively for smaller areas rather than vast areas. Santapau (1956) very rightly, put emphasis on the preparation of local floras by various, universities in India, in his presidential address at the 35th Annual Meeting of the Indian Botanical Society, held at .

Further, with the attainment of independence and the recent trend of general public awareness there has been tirge for proper utilization of our plant wealth, both for the food plants and medicinal plants resources. Needless to say, the first stage of such an awareness of plant wealth would be authentic identification of plant species with in the area of study. 2

The systematic botanist of later age carried out some of the suggestions made by Hooker and published provincial floras for the then administrative states, in the north, Duthie wrote the"Plora of Upper Gangetic Plain and of.the adjacent Siwalik and sxob-Himalayan tracts", Parker published- "Forest flora for the Punjab v/ith Hazara and ", Besides there are floras for small areas as well. For instance, Lahore District Flora by Joshi (1936) and Pbrest flora of the Siwalik and Jaunsar" by Kanjilal (1911), osmastan (1927) published a Forest flora of Kumaon, containing more than 800 species. Generally speaking, local floras are much more valuable than those for bigger areas because exploration of vegetation can be carried out intensively for the former, leaving out very few plants-.

The Flora of British India by Sir, J.D, Hooker is the only flora <£ the Indian subcontinent. It is of much to interest/point out that some 85 (Eighty five) plants have been included in Hooker Flora reported from Upper Gangetic Plain, collected from some specific localities such as , DehraDun, , Agra, , , , Banaras () Delhi and Aligarh, Not a single ^ plant has been reported or collected from Sitapur,

Inspite of the fact that district Sitapur falls within the boundries of Upper Gangetic Plain and within the area 3 covered by Northern Circle of Botanical Survey of India . Educationally, Sitapur is quite backward, even today there are only three degree colleges in whole district. Out of these three degree colleges no one have Botany department even upto graduate level.

As a result of cumulative effect of this factor less explored, inspite of having bright prospects of providing novelties because it has Tarai regions. Rivers, Jhils and some Bhur region.

Another object of undertaking this project is to contribute to proposed, "Flora of Modern India". An up to date and comprehensive flora is an essential tool not only for taxonomists, but also to ecologists, geneticists, horti­ culturists and indeed to all those who are concerned in any way with the green world. When we see "Flora of British India" by J.D. Hooker, in this perspective, we can realize that this flora is no more capable of providing necessairy informa­ tions needed by a modem botanist, since it is more than hundred years old and has not been revised even once in this duration. In the last one century a good number of plants would have vanished and others would have reached on the verge of extinction. On the other hand a large number of , plants would have entered and got naturalised in this area, hence Hooker's flora can easily be called as out dated. i

We have, just talked of vanished or about to vanish species. Such species can be given adequate protection if the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 is extended to plant. But before doing so, endangered plants will have to be spotted out, only then it would be wise to declare the refuges and ecological niches for the threatened plants, which are generally great mountain chains of the Himalayas, Vindhya and Satpura ranges, as natural reserved and protected areas.

In a vast country like India a single department or institution cannot cope the exploration problem. Botanical Sxirvey of India, a government establishment, is considered as responsible for plant exploration in India. Indian Universities can also solve this problem by engaging their students in plant exploration at post graduate and research level. The early part of the 20th centiiry, however marked the decline of botanical activity in the various regional departments and virtual abolition of the Botanical Survey of India in 1937, there was a time of a temporary lull and decline in interest for taxonomic studies and exploration work.

The Botariical Survey of India is presently the main institution devoted to exploration of the plant vi^ealth. The function of Botanical Survey of India clearly lay down the close relationship between the botanical exploration and utilization of plant resources and hence collections simply for the sake of collections and preparation of herbaria have been kept as a low priority, it is relevant to mention here for appreciation by the scientists in the B.S.I, that an adequate exploration and knowledge of flora of our country is primarily the responsibility of this department. Most of the other scientists doing botanical explorations do these as their secondary activity, their primary fxinction being teaching or research in some other area. By well planned and well accomp­ lished botanical explorations the scientist of the survey can prove that the field botanists or plant taxonomists do not play the second fiddle to any other discipline of botany.

After reorganization of the Botanical Survey of India in 1954 and incorporation in it later of the Calcutta herbarium (now called the Central National Herbarium)' and the regional circles and herbaria have now opened opportunities for floristic and taxonoraic studies in the country. The future is a challenging and there is fruitfull opportunity for young enthusiastic botanists to venture out in field, thus promoting the importance and usefulness of botanical explorations to mankind.

In the past, many universities have produced floras (Santapau 1962) and continue to do so. Many instances are there of such floras e.g. Flora of Delhi by J.K. Maheshwairi (1963) Flora of Visakhapatnam by Venkatishwarlu Bhiravamurty and Rao (1972), Flora Gorakhpuransis by Srivastava (1976), Flora of Bhopal by Oomachan, Flora of Aligarh by Husain 6

(1971) etc. Certain difficulties are bound to arise for completing floristic work at University Centres, but Bhandari (1977) is of.opinion that a conscientious worker can overcome them by working for short intervals at regional and central herbaria, where the availability of rich literature and material will more than compensate their absence at the University departments. 7 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Ever since the publication of the Hooker's Flora of British India (1872-1897), there had been very little plant exploration in our country till the middle of this century. Though a large number of regional floras were pxjblished in first quarter or early part of the present century, it is evi­ dent that most of them were based on the collections v/hich were available also to the various collaborators Hooker's work.

Masterly reviews on the history of botanical exploration in India have been written by such stalwarts as King (1899), Agharkar (1938), Biswas (1943), Santapau (1956) Burkill (1965). The earliest explorations during modem times were made by the Portugese and Dutch. During the beginning of the 16 century the botanical work of the Portugese Garciad'orta in Goa included the establishment of a botanical garden for the study of native drugs and their uses, finally leading to the publication of his "OS Cologuis" in 1965, During this period there was also exchange of scientific information with counterparts in Surope. Garciad'orta's work was followed by the most significant publication of Dutch botanist in the 17th century "Hortus Malabaricus" by Heinrich van Rheeds,

During the 17th, l8th and 19th centuries undertaken explorations in the diffeirent part of the country resulted in a knowledge of the flora of India, in the 18th centuri"-, mention must be made the distinguish botanist Johan Gerhard Koening, a pupil of Carl Linnaeus, started with much zest, to impart botanical knowledge in southern India, He throw himself with great energy into a study of the flora of the MadfSiPCoast which, earlier had been sampled by Sam Browne and Burkley, Linnaeus and Retzius published lists of the plants to show the characteristic flora of the costal plain of Coromandel.

After the establishment of the Indian Botanic Garden by Robert Kyd in 1787, William Roxburgh published the following monumental works. Plants of the coromendel coast (1795-1819), Hortus Bengalensis (1814)& Flora indica (1820-1824, 1832).

During the first half of ,the 19th Century, the contributions of I'/allich, Griffith, Royle, V/ight, Edgeworth, T. Thomos and other are important, Nathaniel Wallich who succeeded Buchanan-Hamilton in 1817 organised expiditions into the remote and then little known iregions of Kumaon, Nepal, Sylhet, Tenasserim, Pdnang and , acutally, he took a botanical survey of a major part of the Indian subcontinent and made extensive collections and all these were distributed among the herbaria of Europe.

William Griffith (1842-1844) officiated as suprintendent of the Garden during Wallich»s absence on leave. He extensively surveyed in Tenasserim South Burma, extending upto Assam valley where he explored Mishm, IChasia and Naga hills. He also botanise in the Himalayas particularly in Simla hills and upto Narmada valley in Central India. Griffith took particular interest in enhancing the condition of the herbariim and his extensive notes and drawings were published in nine volumes posthxjmously. The name of the Wallich and Griffith are associated with the finding of wild bushes of tea, which they spotted in upper Assam. Royle's illustration of the Botany of Himalaya were a significant contribution.

The visit of Sir J.D. Hooker in 1849 and his travel in eastern India, particularly in Sikkim Himalaya exercised - great influence on the further botanical work in India J.D, Hooker with Thomas Thomson made extensive and thorough collections in the Khasi hills of Assam. j.D. Hooker's (assisted by botanist) "Magnum opus" was the Flora of British India (1872-1897).

Michael Pakenham Edgeworth (1812-1851), when stationed at Ambala on administrative service made botanical explorations into the Himalaya where the collected a number of plants. Soon he focussed his attention on the relation of crops to soils and then extended his observations on the relation of wild plants to the Same soil, he published these results in the Journal of the Asiatic society of Bengal in 183 9 and this paper may be regarded as the first ecological paper published in India, He also collected plants and in addition explored the hills west of Simla like Mandi and Kangra and also Kulu and Chamba. 10

During 1855 Thomas Thomson joined office in the botanic Garden. He is joint author of the first volxime of a new "Flora indica" published in 1355, Thomson who retired in 1861# was succeeded by Thomas Anderson and he was mainly res­ ponsible for the introduction of Cinchona in the Darjeeling and sikkim-Himalaya. Anderson's departure from India in 1-869, for two years (1869-1872) c.B. Clarke, a well known botanist acted as the superintendent of the garden. He was one of the distinguished collaborators in Hooker et al.,"Flora of British India". He made collection journey in Nilgiris, Sikkim, Khasi Hills, Kangranand,chamba and lastly Kashmir.

The establishment of the Botanical Survey of India under George King in 1890 as the first Director at Howrah , • and centres for botanical work at Saharanpur, Bombay and Madras along with the contributions of Barber, Clarke, Cooke, Duthie, Gamble, Lawson and others marked the highlights during the closing of l9th century. The credit for pxjblication of the Annals of the Royal Botanic Garden goes to King, Another impor­ tant achievement was the completion of the seven volumes of the monumental "Flora of British India".

King was succeeded by David Prain in 1897, a Surgeon- Major. He gained world wide reputation for his studies on the genera pedicularis and Dioscorea and the regional Flora entitled Bengal Plants. After his retirement in 1906 A.D, Gage succeeded him and continued in office for a large period of 17 years. He II is reputed for his remarkable studies on Euphorbiaceae and the Burmese Flora C.C. Calder succeeded him in 1923. He is well known for his outstanding studies on Qxalis and vegetation patterns of India, Lastly K, Biswas and D. Chatterjee were important Indian taxonomists well-known for their contributions on the systematics taxonomy and phytogeography of India.

The exploratory phase and the floristic investigations carried out by the British personnel, medical and forest officer resulted in the publication of several excellent regional floras by Cooke (1901-1908), Duthie (1903-1922). Gamble (1901-1908) (completed by Fischer, 1915-1936), Haines (1921-1925) and Kanji Lai, Kanjilal and Das (1934-1940.) during the early part of 20th century'-,

Poineer floristic works on the region of Upper Gangetic Plain include those of Munro (1344), Edgeworth (1852, 1867), King (1871, 1878, 1832), Anderson (1859) and Duthie (1886), Parker (1913), 3.L. Gupta (1928) and Kanjilal (1933) have also included portion of this area within the scope of their publications. Duthies, Flora (1903-1922) still continues to be the major floristic work meant exclusively for the area. The portions from Araceae to Cype^raceae of the Flora was published by Parker and Turrill, Poaceae was not included. This lacuna Was filled up by Raizada and associates (Raizada, 1954; Raizada, Bharadwaja and jain, 1957; Raizada and Jain 1964, 1966) in his most recent work Raizada (1976) has brought together all the addition made to Duthie's Flora. 12

Recent spurt of publications on new additions by various authors gives a clear indication otherwise. More than 2S0 taxa of angiosperms have already been added to Duthie • s work. Raizada (1931, 1935, 1936, 1939, 1950, 1958) gave the lead in recording such additions followed suit. Some of these plants so added, like Acalypha australis L, (Singh,1967}, Anthriscus scandicina Hans, (Babu, 1963), Bupatorium riparium Reg. (3abu»1969 a), Galinsoga ciliata Blake (3abu, 1969 b) , Silene alba Krause, (Nair, 1969), Solamjm triquetrum Cav. (Husain 196S), Spliva anthemifolia R. Br, (Bhattacharya, 1963 a) ^^*^ Trifolium tomentosum L. (Babu 1969, c), Cotula australis (Seib ex spring Dakshini, K,M,M. and M.R, Vijaya Raghavan, 1970), Paracarym glochidiatum B.C., Geissapis cristata Wt. & Am (Srivastava & Dixit, 1972), Kohautia naqporensis Brace ex. Hanis (Sharma, 1973), Wrightia dolichocarpa Bahadur et Bennettsp nova (Bahadur & Bennett, 1973), Cyprus me1anospermus sp, bjfolius (Misra & Verma, 1979), Zingiber spectabile Griff. (Giri et. at. 1982), Melochionodiflora Sw, (Maiti et. al. 1982), Diospyros hirsuta L.f,, Thrixspermumn^lbum (Ridl.) Schltr, (Nair, N.C. and Mohanan 1982), Chioananthus montanus Bl. (Srivastava S.K. and S.L. Kapoor 1982), Sida elongata Blime. and Sida javensis Cav. (Mathew, Philip and Sivarajan, 1983), Hiptage candjcans Hook f. (Srivastava R.C. 1983), Clitoria arborescens R. Br, (Bhumik and Das 1983) were detected for the first time in India Rau (1961) described a new taxon namely Vi

Alectra parasitica A. Rich Var. Chitrakutensis Rau from Banda, district (U.P.), Peucedanum dehradunensjs Babu, (1970) is another new record from this area. Authors like jain R,K, (1958) Jain S.K. & Katwal (I960), Kapoor & Srivastava (1960)> Murty, & Singh (1961 a, 1961 b, 1966), Nair & Bhartya (1962), Raizada & Sharma (1962), Singh (1963, 1964), vaid (1964), Dakshini & Chauhan (1965), Hingoorani & Gour (1965), Verma et. al. (1965), 3abu (1966), R.3. Gupta (1966), Malhotra (1966, 1969), Murty and Singh (1966), Husain (1967), Saxena (1967), jain S.K. (1968), Dixit & Singh (1968), Maheshwari s^ Sharma (1969), Venkata Reddy (1969 a), Maithani & Gour (1969), Kapcor & Kapoor (1970), iialhotra (1970, 1971), Janardhanan & Prasad (1971), Singh (1971 a), Somdeva & Arora (1971), Bahadur et _al. (1973 a), Sahni & Maithani (1974), Singh et al. (1980), Saxena & Vyas- (1979), Singh K.K. (1979), Singh & Tomar (1982), added to our knowledge on distribution of some additional taxa in upper Gangetic Plain.

in the past, universities and other institutions ^.vithin the area interested in floristic studies were limited (Sxobra- manyam & Nayar, 1971), A perusal of the literature shows that workers of some of these institutions have attempted to study the flora of certain scattered pockets in this area. Srivastava . (1938, 1949) prepared list of plants occuring in Allahabad Kapoor (1962), Srivastava (1963), Balapure & Srivastava (1964), Sharma (1964) and Husain and Kapoor (1970) made valuable contri- 14

butions towards a better knowledge of the Flora of district.Balapure(1971) has prepared an account with useful keys o-f nearly 130 taxa of grasses occuring in Lucknov; district. Verma and Misra (1979). An enxamerative account of 8B plant species of angiosperm which are new addition to the Flora of . Trivedi & Sharma (1965), Dixit, Verma & Srivastava (1966), Sahai & Sinha (1968), P.K. Gupta (1969), Siddiqui £: Dixit (1969)., Singh Ec Dixit (1972), and Srivastava 1976 Studied the Flora of , Account of Cyperaceae of Dehradun Valley and adjacent Siwaliks was given by Somdeva & Naithani (1974, 1975), Gandhi et al. (1961) prepared a similar account of the grasses of Jaipur, other areas that have attracted the attention of different workers include Kota by R.S. Gupta (1965, 1966 a), Agra (Watts, 1953, Bhardwaj et al., 1956), Ajmer (Sharma, 1958)^ Bharatpur (Sarup, 1960, Sarup & Tondon, 1962). Bhopal ^Oommachan, 1966 (1971), 1976, Oommachan & Billore, 1969] . Chambal Valley (Agarkar, 1969), Delhi (Mukherjee, 1953, Rangaswamy and Chakrabarty, 1966), Gwalior (Kenover, 1924, Agarkar & Tuteja 1965, 1969), Hastinapur (Murty & Singh, 1961 c), jaunpur (Singh & Dixit, 1969, Singh & Singh, 1972), Meerut (Singh, 1971), Mirzapur (Srivastava, 1965, Venkata Reddy, 1969), Muzaffamagar (Gupta, 1969, 1961, Tayal & Bhasin, 1970), Aligarh (Husain, 1971)> (Haque, 1984), and Saugor (Pandey, 1949, 1953 Bhattacharya, 1955, Srivastava, 1956). Most of these works are in the form of check list, Maheshwari's 15

(1963) Flora of Delhi and Husain's (1971) Flora of Aligarh are more detailed work with keys and other useful informations.

An attempt have been made by the Botanical Survey of India for a systematic study of the flora of some areas of this region, Rau (1969) compiled a check list for the Flora of upper Gangetic Plain based on all the informations available then. Babu's (1977) work on the herbaceous flora of Dehradun is an eye opener to the fact that a detailed and careful study of these areas, will definitely be scientifically rewarding. Panigrahi and Arora (1962), Arora et al. (1964), Raja gopal (1965), Rajagopal & Panigrahi (1965, 1966), Panigrahi & Rajagopal (1967, 1968) and Panigrahi & Saran (1968), Studied, the Flora of Allahabad, Bhattachar/a (1963 b, 1964), prepared a pre­ liminary account on the Flora of Mirzapur, The arid zone unit of central circle. Botanical Survey of India explored the district of Jhalwar, Kota and Bundi, Majumdar (1971) has compiled a synoptic flora for this area, the first part of which has already come in print. Other important pockets for which floristic accounts have been published include (Pangrahi et al., 1969), Bulandshahar (Singh, 1959), Dehradun- Mothronwala swamp (Dakshini, 1970, 1974)^ Dehradun-Sahasradhara (Malhotra, 1972), Gorakhpur (Panigrahi & Saran, 1967)* Hamirpur (Bhattacharya & Malhotra, 1964), Lucknow (Patil, 1958, 1960, 1963 and Shahabad (Jain & Kotwal, 1960 b). 0

During the course of survey of literature the author has gone through the "Flora of British India" by Hooker and Flora of Upper Gangetic Plain by Duthie to point out the plants referred to Sitapur district, not a single plant has been reported from Sitapur district by Hooker in Flora of British India and Duthie in Flora of Upper Gangetic Plain. 17 PI+AN OP WORK

The district of Sitapur is situated in the northern region of , ', Physiographic observation shows that Sitapur district is a plain slopping gradually from North to South or Southeast. However the level of the surface is interrupted by several ditches, Jhils, Canals, rivers, it is bounded on the north by Tarai area of Nepal, on the east by the river Ghaghra, on the west river Gomti, forms most of the boundry and separates the and 3 arab anki di s t rict.

The district stretches betv/een latitude 26°3 0«,- 28*45' north to longitude 79°55' - 82° east with an area 1523 5.2 Sq. K

The district consists of 5 namely Sitapur (also the district headquarter), ,Sidhouli, Misrikh and Mahmoodabad.

SOIL - Soil is superficial surface covering in the earth crust. There is least doubt that soil plays an important role in determining the type of vegetation of any particular localit; In the district of Sitapur 5 types of soil have been recognised as shown in the following table.

S.NO. Soil series Soil type 1 The Tarai Sitapur type 1 2 The Khadar II II 2 3 The Low lands II II 3 4 The Uplands II II 4 The Trans Gomti plains u

CLIMATE -

The district of ^itapur experience sxibtropical monsoon type of climate which is characterised by a season rythm produced by south v/est and north west monsoon. Reversal of prevailing winds takes place regularly twice in the course of the year. The wind of the continental origin which blow from west to east and covers the period of Movember to middle of June and its known as dry monsoon while in other part of the winds a3re oceanic and blow from east to west and cover the period from mid June to middle or end of October.

On the basis of the direction of v;inds the year can be devided into the season, i.e. the season of north east monsoon and the season of south west monsoon. The season of south west monsoon or the wet monsoon lasts from June to middle or end of October. The wet monsoon commonly known as rainy season and is influenced by the hxixr.id winds of oceanic origin, and its main characteristics are cloudy weather, heavy rainfall and high relative hijmidity.

The north east monsoon or dry monsoon extends from November to middle of June. This period is characterised by the dry winds of continental origin and marked by extreemes of temperature, clear iSkies and low humidity.

It is well known fact that the type of the vegetation in a locality depends upon the climate, soil and past history. 1S>

Thus the detail study of these, is essential to the clear understanding of impact of these factors on vegetation. The climate factors that play the major role in the determining the vegetation are:

i) Temperature ii) Rain fall iii) Relative humidity iv) Wind velocity, dust stroms, etc.

Planning of the fie»ld work;-

As the district covers a vast area and has a rich vegetation, hence the field work may be planned to begin with the collection of the plants first v/ithin the radius of 15-20 km, from the centre of each thesil and extended later. Weekly or fortnightly visits will be made to each in every season of the year. The whole project will be extended oVer a period of three years, out,of which the third year will be . meant for revision. Side by side, the plants collected will be identified, examined critically, and mounted on herbarium sheets. Keys will be prepared after the completion of collec­ tion, Phenological and ethnobotanical data will also be collected along with the plant collection, in the mean time pedological and meteriological data pertaining to district under investigation will be collected with the help of various government agencies and departments. These data are quite 20 important in view of their determining effect on the vegetation of the area. Meteriological data will include temprature, annual rainfall, relative hijmidity and wind velocity etc. Pedological data will include topcgraf^ry, soil types and alkaliriity and salinity of the soil.

Field work;

Certain equipments are indispensable to plant collectio particularly, knife, trowel, scissors, measuring tape, hand lens and specimen tubes are useful article for a plant collecto without these articles collection is not possible. But if a collector having a pair of scissors, a hoc (khurpa) a sharp knife and nylon string about 25-30 metre alongv/ith a bob fastened to its one end, blotters, field press, field book and polythene bags will face no problem in the field. The nylon string can be used to lopp of the branches of the high trees as well as to take out the hydrophytes,

in case of bamboo and Pandanus collection, one more thing is needed that is the heavy gloves to protect against spines and irritating hairs and a pair of good pruning shears is also indispensable. The specimen to be collected should be selected judiciously and in this regard following points should be kept in mind. «l1

1. Select the specimens that are free from evidence of insect feeding, rust infections and other obvious pathological symptoms,

2. ordinarily avoid the depauperate individuals,

3. Ensure that the specimen is either in flowering or fruiting condition, sterile materials generally worthless,

4. If specimen is herbaceous, always include enough of the underground parts to shov/ their character.

Arrangement of the specimen within the pressing paper is an important step in preparing the herbarium specimens, When the specimen is fresh, its parts are usually pliant and can be arranged easily. Skill in specimen arrangement comes with experience, and many collectors take justifiable pride in their work. There are many aspects to plant pressing that are learned best from experience and by working with collectors of experience, but in the begining following points may be kept in the mind to achieve encouraging results,

1, Efficiency is obtained from the pressing paper and the press only V'^rhen the maximum surface of the paper is covered by the specimen or specimens,

2, A specimen should be restricted to a single folded sheet of pressing paper, some large-foliaged are exceptions. li

When individual plant are very small many may be pressed in the single pressing paper.

3. Herbacious specimens longer"than 16" may be accommodated in to by folding in a V - shaped, M- shaped or M- shaped manner,

4. The reduction of pressing paper size to 16 inches is necessary to -avoid making specimens too long to be mounted on standard herbarium paper (lli^ by 16*5 inch).

5. Avoid breaking brittle stems at point of fold by means of moderate maceration at the fold before bending.

6. Springy stems may be held in place aft:-r folding by slipping slitted slips of papar over the bent ends.

7. Prune specimens 'judiciously to prevent appreciable overlapping of parts, but alv/ays leave a basal portion (petiole segment, or flower pedical) to indicate location of pruned part.

8. Whenever possible, arrange one or more leaves (for parts of the leaves) with lower side upper most.

9. When leaves are pinnately compound, it m.ay be necessary to excise all except one leaf, if the remaining leaf is too large for the sheet, it may be split lengthwise (or the leaflets removed from one side) providing the terminal leaflet (when present) remains attached and is not multilated. II

10. Large palmately compound leaves may be split in half lengthwise and one half discarded,

11. Plants with ganopetalous corolla should have few flowers pressed separately and some of these split open and spread out before pressing.

12. In case of doubtful plants few flowers may be preserved in 10% alcohol in specimen tubes bearing the sa.~e mumber as the plant in field book.

13. All roots and other under ground parts should be thoroughly v/ashed before pressing,

14. Care should be taken to collect both male and female flowers in case of those families having unisexual flowers e.g. Cucurbitaceae, Huphorbiace^^e, Salicaceae and Moraceae etc.

15. Bulky structure such as large fruits .-nay be placed whole in a cloth bag with a nimibered tag and dried as such-. It . is advisable, to press a thin median cross section and a median longitudinal section to demonstrate the size shape and arrangement of the seeds inside the firuit,

16. To make any specimen of bamboo plant, it is important to know that what structures are most significant taxonomically, and what information to record and part to collect information. Thomas & Stephen (1983), The following parts should be collect for herbarium. 21

i) TWO nodes and included interhode. The culm nay be split lengthwise, it culm is not too long cut a shorter section and include only one node, but measure and record length of intarnods, -"'—-*.

ii) At least two'culm leaves from that part of the culm • where they are most representative in size and shape. If the leaves have .already fallen, select from these, When the sheath is persistent cut it from the Culm and press it flat, 'even though this may result in craking and spliting, iii) Take a representative branch comolement from mature or old culm, even from dead culm that show the features accurately. Cut culm Cc cm above and below the node and trim branches to Ca 5 cm at least including the first node large culm section may be split in half to save space, AS with culm sections, allovNf to air dry and remove all sheaths.

iv) Leafy twigs arranging the leaves to show both surfaces, included leaves from young and old branches if there is a significant size difference press immediately to avoid curling. If this is not possible the material can be wetted and retained in a tightly secured plastic bag. Large leaves may require trimming and folding or dividing and pressing in more than one sheet. 23

v) Flovifering branches at all stages of development. When a flowering bamboo is found in the leafless state and leafy non-flowering culmps are encountered nearby, do not assume that the two are the same species, if uncertain, collect each plant under a separate number and cross reference,

vi) For running types collect a section of the rhizome Ca, half a meter long. For culmp forming types collect. 2. several rhizome and sever culms Ca 15 cm, above the ground. Air-dry the sample and remove all scales (sheaths).

17. Benjamin (1983), describe the method of collection of Pandanaceae (Pandanus) that will follow by the collector,

18. Fleshy structures may be preserved in liquid. Each specimen is alloted a number of field book in order to avoid any confusion regarding its identity after drying, poisoning and mounting. The following information will prove helpful during identification of the plants,

1. Habit and habitats, the type of the soil on which the plant was growing. 2. Plant in association. 3. Approximate relative abundance of the species. 4. Color and odour of flower. 5. Time of opening and closing of flower. 2&

6, Latex, if present and its color.

7. Local names, economic valtie if any.

For trees, the following informations are worth noting.

a) Size b) Shape of the crown c) Bark characters d) Girth of the trunk e) Time of tha leaf fall f) Leaf renewal

The plant material which is freshly collected should preferably be pressed on the spot in a wooden field press. A field press made up of two wooden frames with few blotters and a cotton string to fasten it, proves quite handy and portable. Another method is to store plants in a vasculum. The vasculum of about 20 cm x 20 cm x 60 cm is the right size. This should be lined with cork internally to retard wilting ,of plants and painted while externally to reflect the sunlight and to make its location easy among green vegetation. The plant stored in vasculum. should be processed at the earliest, but a full vasculum kept in a cool place may keep several kind of plants in healthy state over night. The third and most convenient method is to put, the plants in a plastic (polyt.hene> bag and to press them at the camp. The bags are quite handy and a large 27 number of them may be put in shoulder bag. In winter this method gives excellent results but in summer and rainy season (on sunny days) the plants dry within hours. For the collection of seeds, small vials are most suitable,

Labdratorv work pressing:- The specimens (unless very bulky or spiny) are best laid in flimsies pressed in between sheets of absorbent drying paper in lattics presses. The plant to be pressed is put in a folded blotting paper. The blotting paper including plant is put between the folds of a folded news paper. Between two such sheets one or two more newspaper are placed. This prevents the plant from receiving the impressions of harder parts of the plant above and below it, Fosberg (1939) describe the use of pads" made of cotton batting placed between layers of the blotting paper for uniform pressure on the whole plant. Pads may be prepared of news papers also by folding them several times. The cotton pads are easily made and result in the preparation of excellent"" . - specimens, especially of bulky plants.

In case of aquatic plants frequently are filmy or somewhat filamentous and are difficult to arrange on the sheet when removed from the water. The technique generally used is to tear some unprint pressing paper in fourths, float the paper on the water until completly wetted, flat the specimen nearby, slide over the wet and slightly submersed paper, lift the paper careful: 2^

(sloping it to facilitate water runoff) and, keeping the specimen in place on it, place the wet sheet and its specimen v>?ithin a regular pressing sheet.

Drying; Generally two technique are in practice to ar^ the plants. One without the help of artificial heat and second is with the help of artificial heat, this method is generally used in temperate regions but in India, .climate does not need arti­ ficial heat, to diry the plants, hence only previous method would be practice. The plants are placed in pressing papers betv/een the blotters of a conventional field press. The press is locked up for about 24 hours. This is kno^^n:l as "sweating" period. It is then opened, and as blotters ' are removed each pressing sheet is turned back, and parts rearranged as situation demands. This rearranging is an important step for at the time the part of the most plants are somewhat flacid and have lost their natural spring. For a better result the following point should keep in mind,

1. A minimum of about a week is required for completion of drying. 2. Blotters must be change 3 or 4 times, every wet blotter removed must be dried, usually by placing in the sun.

3. Specimens are "sweated" in the field press for about 24 hours.

4. The drying press is locked up with less pressure than that exerted on the plants when it in the field press. 29

Poisoning;- Herbarium specimens are subject to serious damage by being eaten by various insects. Notable among these predators is the tobacco or herbarium beetle (Lasioderma serricdrne) or the drug stors beetle (Stegobium paniceum) and more minuts and colorless book louse (Atrooos divinatoria). These insects complete their life cycle v;ithin dried specimens, attacking material of all ages and chewing through the sheets to pass from one specimen to another. To solve this problem it is advisable to poison the dried plants prior to mounting. Many methods are in practice like fumigation by cynide para dichlo- robenze (PD3)/ Carbon disulphide gas, a mixture of ethylene dichloride and carbon tetrachloride, spraying the dichloro- diphenyle trichloroethane (DET) to the specimens. Another methoc placing the soecix-nens in a chamber which is heated to a degree lethal to the insect. 3ut the standard and common practices in many herbari is to dip the plants in 2% solution of xMercuric chloride (Corrosive sublimate) prepared in 95% ethyl clcohol. This is highly toxic and generally lethal to all forms of animal life. And it does leave any coloured residue on the specimens. But it fails to penitrate the coriaceous foliage and heads of many compositaenetc. it is not a permanent poison. As years pass, the material become inert and is then worthless as an insecticide. Now plants needs fresh treatment.

Mounting;- Mounting of the specimens is a phase of specimen preparation that has been developed from a number of different approaches, in this country, specimens are mounted on sheets of 31) standard size 29 cm x 42 cm. The quality of the paper varies according to the need of herbarium. Curators of most herbaria recognize that their collections are permanent accessions, and mount the specimens on the longest lasting and most durable paper available for its weight, a 100% rag paper. Many methods are there to fasten the specimens to the sheet the first and oldest method is that of sewing but this method is now out dated and out of practice. Another method involves the use of gumed cloth strips (Adhesive Strip), Narrow strios of such taps are pasted across the plant surface in such a way as net to obscure the critical parts on the specimen. The plant mounted in this way can be easily removed to examine critically and then refixed on the fresh sheet. The disadvantages v/ith this method are the laclc cf perm.anence, the additional time required and the apoearance of the sheet bearing may strips. Cellulose tape and wire staples can also be employed but fo3:mer is not perma­ nent and the later tends of rust.

There are another method to mount specimens with the good quality (e.g. Fevicol, Movicol) adhesives. Generally there are three techniques most commonly used. First, glass plate method, requires the use of a piece of plate glass at least (35 cm X 50 cm}. The paste is spread thinly over most of the surface with a flat brush. The specimen is removed from the pressing sheet, placed face upward on the prepared plate, with all oarts of the lower side in contact with paste. It is then 31 lifted, with the aid of forceps, and transferred to the sheet of mounting paper. The only disadvantage with this method is the wastage of adhesive.

The second, and alternate, technicrue requires no glass plate. The specimen is laid on the pressing paper, lower side upper most, and with the aid of sash brush, small amount of paste are brushed directly on the major portions of the specimen. It and the label are then affiled to the herbarium sheet .as noted above. This method is much time consaming.

A third technique of applying paste is not generally used, except in connection v/ith mounting aquatics or oth?r flimsy subjects. The specimen to be mounted is laid, lower side upper most, on a piece of chesecloth. It is sprayed with a diluted solution of paste by means of an atomizer, and then flipped over into the sheet of herbarium paper.

More recently it has been found (Archer, 1950) that specimens may be affixed to the sheet neatly and readily by application of thin bands, of quick drying liquid plastic. Archer emphasized the importance of using permanent type of plastic that would not become yellow with age nor crack with usage.

Herbarium lebel, to v/hich all the informations regarding the plant are transferred from the field book is the most important part of herbarium sheet. It varies in size and format 32 but is generally about 8,5 cm x 11 cm. it is usually pasted on the lower right hand comer of the sheet. It should bear following data, a) Banner head line to show the regions accompaniaa by the name of institution, b) Botanical name of the plant with author's citation c) locality of collection •' . d) The habitat e) Name of collectors f) Collector's field observations g) Date of collection h) Name of determiner

FILING;- Herbarium specimens, after being mounted, are sorted by family and by genus, ,Those of each genus are place within a folded genus cover. If there are several sheets of given species, they are placed in a genus cover apart from the miscellaneous species of that genus, 3y convention, the genus cover has the name of the genus written or printed on the lower left edge, and when the cover is restricted to specimens of ^ single species the genus initial and species name are on the lower right margin.

The sheets are usually stored in specially built pigeon­ holed steel herbarium cases arranged family vise in accordance with an accept ed system of classification, in India mostly Bentham and Hooker's system is followed, it is customary to 33

file the genera and species alphabetically under a family. An index Card should be displayed outside each door of the herbarium.

Post filing care;- Since herbarium sheets are not treated with any poison etc. hence they are susceptible to the attack of insects. Further, as mentioned earlier, Murcuric chloride also loses its effect after sometime, Kence certain insect repellants are used to keep the insects away from the sheets and plants. Repellents are chemicals that deter infestation by insects but do not function necessarily as agent that are toxic or lethal to the insect. The two principal repellents are maphthalene compound naphtha flakes') and paradichlorobenzene are two impoirtant insect repellents, Merril (1948) advise to the place a small muslin bag filled with mixture of two parts naphthalene and one part paradichlorobenzene in each case. The bags are refilled with the mixture once a year.

Preservation of succulent plants and retention of color.

The succulent plants are too bulky and fleshy. The thick coating of wax on the surface of certain leaves slows do^vn the process of drying upto great extent with the result that the fungus and other micro - organism infect the 34

plant before it dries. The problem can be overcome by immersing them for about 30 seconds or untill they become limp in hot water, in this state their process of drying with speed up by many times. Prior to this treatment, the original morphological features of the plant must be noted dov/n.

Succulent material as found in the Aizoaceae, Cactacaas, Suphorbiaceae and Asclepiadaceae may required drastic treatment. The stem of the succulent plant may be cut length v/ise and any soft material scraped out, the plants can then be immersed in boiling water if the situation demands.

At the time of handling of cacti it is necessary?" to wear heavy leather gloves, Sometim.es spines can be removed from fingers by pulling carefully with forceps. The fine spines of the cacti (glochids) can removed by rubbing them off.

When handling the member of Asclepiadaceae e.g. Calotroois orocera need soecial precaution because of their latex may cause several skin diseases or even blindness if got . into eyes.

There are many formulas available for preservation of plant materials in liquid. Each is recommended usually to meet the needs of a particular use for the material. The time honoured liq-uid preservative for general taxonomic use is a 5% aqueous solution of the conmercial formaldehyde, Formeldehyde solutions prevent dicomposition of the material. 35

Colour retention and preservation of flov^?ers by means of formaldehyde fumes have been found satisfactory for some kinds of material and because of the ease of preparation and economy.

Harrington (1947) proposed a technique consist of placing a pad of absorbent cotton in the botton of wide mounted glass. This is then wet with commercial formaldehyde (undiluted) and the cotton covered with a protective perforated cellaphane disk. Fresh flov7ers are placed on the disk and the container is sealed tightly untill the flowers are to be used. Some flowers retain their shape and color for many months, although those of certain families (compositae, commelinaceae, and iridaceae) are for the most part notable exceptions that do not respond favour­ ably to the method.

Preservation of colorless parasitic materials that ordinarily blacken when placed in the usual preser^/ing fluids was reported by Nieuwland and Salvin (1928) to be accomplished by the following procedure,

i) Place Specimen in a test tube of 95% ethyl alcohol add 0.5 g of Sodium sulfite, and 0,5 cc of concentrated hydrochloric acid.

ii)' Seal tightly and shake, and allow to stand at least one week, iii) Siphon or pipette of the alcohol, replace with xylon and seal air tight. 36

Retention of green coloration is frequently desired in pickled material prepared. Several formulas have been found Satisfactory, but one of the simplest to prepare and use is a modification of that by Keefe (1926), as follows:

90,0 cc SQ% ethyl alcohol (isopropyl alcohal) may be used),

5.0 cc Commercial formaldehyde

2.5 cc glycerin 2.5 cc glacial acitic acid 20.0 g cupric chloride (for normally yellow green foliage use half of this quantity), 2,5 g uranium nitrate

Fresh materials is placed directly in the solution and left until needed. Flowers placed in this solution will not retain any of their original colors.

Description;- A critical and careful description, extracted from fresh material is for superior than the description taken from dried material. Only fresh material is suitable for the detection of new morphological characters and thereby new species and varieties, A binocular stereo microscope gives a magnificant and three dimensional view of the material. This microscope gives a good view of hairs and nectorics etc, and is most suitable for critical and detailed study. 37

If, however fresh material is not available dried material can be studied and dissected after a little treatment. The treatment involves the imnersion of dried material in hot Water (about 70-30°C) to which a little of glycerol has been added, for a period varying from few hours to overnight, r-Iicro Herbarium Slides;- This is a nawly developed method aimed at the preservation of dissected floral parts for ready reference in future. The flower is dissected and the floral parts are pressed and dried in folded blotters. The pressure applied depends upon the nature of the material. Some flowers do well under the pressure of a heavy book while other need usual pressing method. These parts are then taken out, treated with 2% mercuric chloride solution prepared in rectified sprit, and arranged on a glass slide (7.5 x 2,5 cm. or 7.7 x 3,8 cm) in a sequence. The size of slide depends upon the number and size^ of floral p=>rts. Floral parts are then covered with transparent adhesive taps, in order to keep the floral parts in proper position with out air bubble the adhesive tape is stretched with fingers and then stuck to the lower side of the slide. Slides are numbered and stored in suitable slide boxes. The slides may retain the shape and size of the floral parts, and Some times even their color, for as may as ten years. These slides may prove a boon for botanist engaged in revisionary and monographic V'^ork, 3S

Identification; For identification purpose "Flora of India" by J.D. Hool-cer. "Flora of Tjpper Gangetic Plain" by J.F. Duthie would ba of great help. They are expected to cover the major portion of the collection. Xn case of a doubtful plant. Central National Herbarium, Howrah and Forest Research Institute, Herbarium, Dehradun would be consulted. Recent pioblications and monographs v/ill also be of much hela. 33 References

Agarkar, D.S, 1969, Enimeration of the Plants of lower Chambal Valley revines, Madhya Pradesh, Bull. Bot. Survey, ind; 11 : 398-402. Agarkar, D.S, and S,C. Toteja 1965. Notes on the Flora of Great* Gwalior Madhya Pradesh, J, Vikr. Uni. 9 : 117-133, Agarkar, D.S, and S.c, Toteja 1969. Addition to the Flora of Greater Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. Plant Science 1: 86-9: Agharkar, S.P. 1938. Progress of Botany during the past twenty five years, in B. Prasad's progress of Science in India. Anderson, T. 1959. Notes on the Flora of Lucknow with catalogue of the cultivated and indigenous plants, j, Asiat. Soc, Beng. n.s. 28: 89-120. Archer, W.A. 1950. New plastic aid in mounting herbarixara sheets Rhodera, 52: 298-299. Arora, CM., V.N, Singh and o.P, Mishra 1964, studies in the Flora Allahabad, proc, Indian Sci, Cong. 398. Babu, C.R. 1966, Notes on some distributional records for North India Bull. Bot, Surv, India 8: 200-201, Babu, C.R. 1968. Anthrlcus scandicina (Welber) Mans - a new record for India J. Bombay, Nat, Hist, Soc, 65: 807-808, Babu, C,R. 1969(a), On the occurrence of Eupatorium riparium Reg. (Asteraceae) in India, Sci, and Cutt, 35 (8}: 401-402, Babu, C,R, 1969(b), Galinsoga ciliata (Raf,) Blake (Asteraceae)- a species new to India Bull, bot, Sur, India 11: 184-185. Babu, C,R. 1969(c). Trlfolixam tomentosxm Linn, (Fabaceae)- A new record for India. Indian For, 95(2): 102. Babu, C.R, 1970, Peucedontam dehradtinesis - new record for upper Gangetic Plain Indian For 96: 535, 4^

Babu,C.R. 1977, Herbacious Flora of Dehradun and Adjacent Regions, New Delhi, Balapiire, K.M. 1971, The grasses of Bull, Bot, Sur. India 13: 64-78. Bahadur, K.N, and H.B. Naithani 1973, New distributional record of, Richardia scabra Linn, in India Indian For. 99(7): 449-453. Balapure, K.M. and J.G. Srivastava, 1964. The vegetation of Lucknow district (u,P,) Lucknow, Bahadur, K.N., R. Dayal and o.P. Raturi 1973a. New plant records for the upper Gangetic plain J, Bombay nat. Hist. Soc, 70(3): 493-498, Bahadur, K,N. and S,S,R, Bennett 1978, A new species of Wrightia R, Br, from India, Indian for 104(1): 32. Benjamin, C. stone 1983, A guide to collecting Pandanaceae (Pandanus Freyclneta, Sararanga) Ann, Miss, Bot* Garden 70(1) : 137, Bhandari, M,M. 1977, Role of university and college students in the studies on Indian Flora Bull, Bot, Surv. India Vol. 19 No. 1-4 pp 200-206. Bhardwaja, R,C,,K,C. Basuchaudhary and S, Sinha, 1956, The grasses of uni. Jour. Res. 5: 285-320, Bhattacharya, S. 1955. A list of leguminous plants of saugar and their distribution within the area Bull, Bot. Soc, univ. Saugar. 285-320. Bhattacharya, U.C. 1963(a). Soliva anthemifolia R,Br., (Compositae)- A new record for India. Bull. Bot. Surv. India 5: 375-376, Bhattacharya, U.C, 1963(b), Contribution to the Flora of Mirzapur i. Some new records tot the district and for the upper Gangetic Plain Ibid. 5: 59-62, Bhattacharya, U.C, 1964, A contribution to the Flora of Mirzapur-li ibid. 6: 191-210, Bhattacharya, U,C, and c,L, Malhotra 1964, Botanical explora­ tion in , District (U,P,) with special reference to aquatics ibid 6: 23-41. 41

Bh\jinik,G.H, and G.C. Das 1983, clltorla arfaorescens R.Br. (Fabaceae) new record and rare plant for India from Khasihill district. J. Econ. Taxon. Dot, 4(2)s 607-608. Biswas, K. 1943, Systematic and taxonomic studies on the flora of India and Burma, Proc, 30th Indian, Sci. Congr. assoc. Calcutta, 101-152. Burkill, i.H. 1965. Chapters on the History of Botany in India, Calcxitta. Cooke, T. 1901-1908. The flora of the Bombay Presidency London. Dakshini, K.M.M. 1970. Flora of Mothrcrwala swamp Forest (District: Dehradun, U.P. India) J. Bomb, Nat, Hist. Soc, 67: 176-186. Dakshini, K.M.M. 1974. Flora of Mothronwala Swamp Forest (District: Dehradun, U.P.) Ibid 71(2): 235-243. Dakshini, K.M.M. and R.K.S. Chauhan 1965. Micrococca murcurialis (Linn.). Benth, An addition to the Flora of Upper Gangetic Plain J. Bcxn. Nat. Hist. Soc, 62: 177, Dakshini, K.M.M. and M.R. Vijaya Raghvan 1970. Cotula australis (Seeb ex. spreng) Hook p. A new record for Northern India. The Indian For. Vol. 96 NO,(1):24, Dixit, S.N. and A.K. Singh 1968. Synnema triflorum (Rox, ex, Nees) o. ktze.- a new record for Upper Gangetic Plain Indian For. 94: 769-771. Dixit, S.N,, S.D. verma and T.N. Srivastava 1966, Addition to ' the rainy season weeds of Gorakhpur, Proc. Nat, Acad, Sci. India 36: 149-156. Duthie, j.F. 1886. Report on a Botanical Tour in Merwara ' (Rajputana) made in Jan. 1886. Calcutta, Duthie, J.F. 1903-1922, Flora of Upper Gangetic plain and of the adjacent Siwalik and Sub-Himalayan Tracts 3 Vols, Calcutta, Edgeworth, M,P. 1852 Catalogue of Plants fotind in Banda, distirict, J, Asiat, Soc, Beng, 21: 24-48, 151-184. 12

Edgeworth, M.P. 1867 Flora Banda J. Linn, Soc, London 304-326. Posberg, P.R» 1939. Plant collecting mannual for field anthropologist, Philadelphia. Gamble, J.S, 1915-1936, Flora of the Presidency of Madras, (Parts 8-11 by C.E.C. Fischer) London, Gandhi, S.M.^P.D. Bhargawa and M.P. Bhatnagar, 1961. Grasses of Jaipur Proc. nat. Acad. Sci, India 313: 183-192. Gupta, B.L. 1928. Forest Flora of chorata, Dehradun and Saharanpur Forest Division, U.P. Calcutta. Giri, G,S,, M.C. Biswas, R.N. Banerjee and N.C. Majumdar 1982. OccTirrence and identity of Zingiber spectablle new record in India j. Econ. Taxon. Bot. 5(1): 251-252. Gupta, P.K. 1969. Common grasses of Gorakhpur, Indian For. 95(5): 324-329. Gupta, P.K. 1961. Flora of District Muzaffamagar in the doab of river Ganga and Jamuna, J. Bomb. Nat. Hist. Soc. 58(3): 749-775. Gupta, R.K. 1960. A preliminary survey of vegetation of Muzaffamagar District in the Upper Gangetic Plain U.P. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. India 30(1): 7-15. Gupta, R.S, 1965. vegetation of Kota and its neighbourhood. Trop. Ecol. 6: 61-70, Gupta, R.S. 1966. Occurrence of Cuscuta reflexa R. in Alwar, Indian For. 192: 406-"5n?I Gupta, R.S. 1966a. A study of hydrophytes and marsh plant of Kota and environs, (India) Trop. Ecol. 7:153-162« Haines, H.H. 1921-1925. The Botany of Bihar and orissa 6 parts London. Harrington, H.D. 1947. Pressing plants in formaldenyde ftames, Txirtox News 25(12): 238. Haque, A. Choudhry 1984. Systematic study of plant in Balrampur (U.P.) Ph.D. thesis (unptjblished). i3

Hingorani, G.R. and R.C. Gour 1965, Short notes on the occurrence of Heliotropium curassavicxam L# in Rajasthan Indian For. 91(5): 293, Hooker, J.D, 1872-1897. Flora of British India 7 vols. London. Husain, S.I, and S.L. Kapoor 1970. Sane intresting plants from Lucknow and its neighboxirhood, j. BcMtib, Nat, Hist. Soc. 67(3): 616-618. Husain, W. 1967. Same new records of plants for the Upper Gangetic Plain, Indin For. 93; 583-585. Husain, w. 1968. Solanxap triquetrvtm Cav. - a new record for India from Aligarh (U.P.) Bull. Bot. Soc. Beng. 22 (1): 237-238. Husain, W. 1971, Systematic study of Plants in Aligarh (U,P.) Ph.D. thesis (Unpublished), Jain, R.K. 1958. Hitherto lonreCorded occurrence of Datura innoxia Mill, in upper Gangetic Plain and the Rajasthan desert Cur. Sci. 27(10): 393-394. Jain, S.K. 1968. Notes on the Indian grasses ix. The identity and distribution of certain taxa. Bull. Bot. Sur. India. 10: 161-164. Jain, S.K. and N.N. Kotwal 1960 a. A note on some little known plants from Rajasthan, Sci. & Cult, 26: 191-192, Jain, S.K. and N.N. Kotwal 1960(b) Vegetation of Shahabad in Rajasthan. Indian For. 86: 602-608. Janardhanan, K.P. and R. Prasad 1971. Ludwigia hyssopifolio (G. Don) Exell.- A new record for upper Gangetic Plain and Rajasthan. Bull, Bot. surv, India 13:160. Joshi, A.C, and s,R, Kashyap 1936. Lahore District Flora Lahore, Kanjilal, P,C, 1933. A forest Flora of Pili|>hit, Oudh, Gorakhpur and Bxindelkhand. ind. For. 27: 227-230. Kanjilal and u,N. Kanjilal 1911, Forest Flora of the Siwalik and jaunsar Forest Division of xmited Provinces of Agra and Oudh, being revised and enlarged edition of Forest Flora of the School Circle, N.W, P. Calcutta, Kanjilal, U,N. and Das (1934-1940) Flora of Assam 5 vols, Calcutta, 44

Kapoor, S.L. 1962. on the botany of Lucknow districrt. J. Bomb, Nat. Hist. Soc. 59: 862-896. Kapoor, S.L. and G.S. Srivastava I960, clecane monophylla Linn. A new record from Upper Gangetic Plain Sci. and Cult. 26: 352. Kapoor, S.L. and L.D, Kapoor 1970. A note on the occurrence of Asparagus acerosus Roxb. (Liliaceae) in the region of Upper Gangetic Plain and Assam Bull. Bot. Sur. India. 14: 273. Keefe 1926. Field and herbarium'techniques. Taxonomy of VasculaJ plants, oxford & IBH publishing Co. Delhi pp. 256-257. Kenover, L,A. 1924. Weed Manual of Gwalior state Calcutta, King, G. 1871. Report on Dehradiin Forest, Allahabad. King, G. 1878. Sketch of the Flora of Rajputana Calcutta, 1878 (reprinted in Indian For. 4: 226-236. 1879), King, G, 1882. List of the plants of Garhwal, Jaunsar Bawar and Dehradun. In Atkinson's Gazetter N.W, prov,, Himalayan districts 1: 288-322, King, G. 1899 The early history of Indian botany Rep, Brit, cussoc. Adv. Sci. (Dover) 904-919. Maheshwari, J.K. 1963. The flora of Delhi, New D^lhi, Maheshwari, J.K. and V.S, Sharma 1969. Some intresting plant from upper Gangetic Plain Bull. Bot. Surv. ind, 11: 454-456. Maiti, G,G,, B. Safui and A. Bhattacharya 1982, Melochia nodiflora Sw. (sterculiaceae) new record for India J. Econ. Taxon. Bot. 3(1): 177-180. Majumdar, R.B. 1971 Synoptic flora of Kota Division(S.E. Rajasthan) Ibid 13: 105-146. Malhotra, C.L. 1966, New distributional records of plant frcxn Upper Gangetic Plain ibid 8: 77-78, Malhotra, C.L. 1969. Nervilia cripta (Bl.) Schltr. a new record for upper Gangetic Plain Ibid. 5: 208. 4d Malhotra, S.K. 1970. Addition to the flora of Dehradun-I Maharashtra Vigyan Patrika 6(1); 39-44. Malhotra, S.K. 1971. Addition to the Flora of Dehradun-II Ibid 6(1): 39-44. Malhotra, S.K. 1972. plants of Sahasradhara Ibid (1 and 2) : 51-62. Mathew, Philip and Sivarajan 1983. Sida elonqata Bliame. .and Sida JavensiinSisS Cav, new record" fo" r India, j, Econ Taxon -r-ryrr-4(2)

Merril, E.D. 1948. on the control of destructive insects in the herbarium journ. Arnold. Arb. 29: 103-110. Misra/ 3,K, and B.K. Verma 1979. Cyprus melanospermTJin ssp. bifolius, new record for Uttar Pradesh India Indian J. For. 2(2) : 169-170. Mukherjee, S.K. 1953, Vegetation of the Delhi ridge j. Bombay, nat. Histl Soc. 51: 439-465. Munro» w. 1844, Hortus Agrensis or a catalogue of all plants in the neighbourhood of Agra. Agra. Murty, Y.S, and V, Singh 1961(a). Two new records from the Upper Gangetic Plain Sci. and Cult. 30(3): 150-151, Murty, Y.S. and v. Singh 1961(b) New plant records for the Upper Gangetic Plain from Meerut and Neighbourhood. Proc, Nat, Inst, Sci, India 27(1): 13-17. Murty, Y.S, and v. Singh 1961(c). Flora of Hastinapur, Agra Uni. Journ, Res, (Sci,) 10: 193-242, Murty, Y.S. and V. Singh 1966, Some little know plants from the Upper Gangetic Plain Sci, and Cult, 32: 597-598, Nair, N.C. and C,N. Mohanan 1982, Diospyros hlrsuta L.P. new record and Thrixspermum album (RTdl) Schltr. new recorxi frcxn peninsular India J. Econ. Taxon. Bot, 3(1) 285-286, Nair, N.C. and R.K. Bhartya 1962, A note on Burgle ferox Salisb, in Alwar. Rajasthan J, Bombay nat. Hist, Soc, 59: 323. Nair, V.J. 1969, Sllene alba (Mill.) Krause- A new record for India Bull, Bot, Sur, ind, 11, 201, 46

Naithanl* H.B. and R.c. Gaxir 1969. Sllyblun marlantam (Linn.) Gaerth, A new record for Dehradxin Indian For, 195 (10): 695-696. Nieuwland, J.A. and Salvin A.D. 1928, Preservation Monotropa and similar plants without discoloration Proc. Indiana, - ACad. sci. 38: 103-104. Ooinmachan, M. 1966 (1971), Ecology and systematics of Bhopal .Plants-I. Rcdny season Plants. Proc, School. Pi. scol, Banaras Hindu University 193-208. ' Ocanmachan, M, 1976, The flora of Bhopal. Oomraachan, M. and K.V. Billore 1969, Asteraceae of Bhopal (M.P,) a systematic study Bull, Bot. Sur. India 11; 35-40. Oomaston, A.E, 1927. A forest flora for Kxmaon Allahabad. Pandeya, S,c. 1949, Flora of the University and neighbourhood Bull, Bot. Soc. Univ. Saugor 2: 20-23. Pandey, S.c. 1953. Flora of the university area and neighbour­ hood. Bull, Bot. Soc. uni. Saugor 3: 32-38, Panigrahi, G,, A,N. Singh and o.P. Misra 1969. Contribution to the botany of the taraiforest of the of Uttar Pradesh Bull, Bot, Surv, India 11: 89-114. Panigrahi, G and CM, Arora 1962, studies in the Flora of Allahabad Proc. Indian sci. Cong. 433. Panigrahi, G and R. Saran 1967. Contribution to the flora of the , Uttar Pradesh, Bull. Bot, Sur, India 9: 249-261. Panigrahi, G. and R. Saran 1968. Contribution to the botany of the Allahabad District. Uttar Pradesh ibid 10: 53-60. Panigrahi, G. and T. Rajgopal 1967. Studies on the flora of Allahabad IV & V the family Graminae 182 proc. not, Acad. sci. India 37: 1-20 & 21-50. Panigrahi, G and T, Rajgopal 1968, Studies on the flora of Allahabad VI-r the family Graminae-3 Group Pooidae J. Indian Bot. Soc. 47: 219-249. Parker, R.N. 1918. A forest Flora of Punjab with Hazara and Delhi, Lahore. Patil, R.P. 1958. The flora of Lucknow and Its environs. Proc. Indian Sci. Congr. 324. 47

Patril* R.P. i960. A key to the Genera of conimon grasses of Lucknow and its environs proc. India Acad, Sci. sect B. 51, 122-132, Patil, R.P. 1963. A contribution to Flora of Lucknow Bull, Bot, Sur. India 5: 1-35, Raizada, M.B. 1931, Contribution to Duthie's Flora of Upper Gangetic Plain from the neighbourhood of Dehradun J. Indian bot Soc. 10: 155-158. Raizada, M.B. 1935, Recently introduced or otherwise imperfectly known plants from the upper Gangetic Plain Ibid. 15: 339-348. Raizada, M.3, 1936. Recently introduction or otherwise imperfectly known plants from the upper Gangetic Plain Ibid 15: 149-167, Raizada, M.B. 1939, Recently introduced or otherwise imperfectly known plants from Upper Gangetic Plain Indian For, Res. 1(5): 223-236, Raizada, M.B. 1950. New or note worthy plants from upper Gangetic Plain. Indian For. 16: 489-97, Raizada, M.B. 1954. Grasses of upper Gangetic Plain and scflme aspects of their ecology Indian For. 80: 24-46, Raizada, M.B. 1958, New plant records for the upper Gangetic Plain Proc. nat, inst. Sci, India 24B: 198-208, Raizada, M.B. 1976. Supplement to Duthie's Flora of the upper Gangetic Plain and of the Adjacent, Siwalik Stab- Himalayan tracts, Dehradun, Raizada, M.B. R.C. Bhardwaja and S.K, Jain 1957. Grasses of upper Gangetic Plain, Panicoideae Part i Maydae and Andropogoneae. Indian For. Sec, n.s. Hot, 4: 171-277. Raizada, M.B. and S.K. Jain 1964, Grasses of Upper Gangetic Plain. Panicoidae, Part-li-Tribe Paniceae Ibid 5: 149-226, Raizada, M.B. and S.K. Jain 1966. Grasses of Upper Gangetic Plain Poidae. Indian For, 92: 637-642. Raizada, M.B. and v.S. Shaxma 1962. New Plant records of the Upper Gangetic Plain from Ajmer Merwara Ibid 88: 356-369, 4S

Rajagopal, T. 1965. New records of species for flora of Allahabad Piroc. Nat, Acad, sc. India Sect. b. 635: 25-45. Rajagopal, T. and Panigrahi 1965, Aliens naturalised in the flora of Allah^ad Proc. Nat. Acad, Sci, India Sect, b 35; 411-422. Rajgopal, T. and G. Panigrahi 1966, New records of species for the flora of Allahabad-n ibid 36: 57-84. Rangaswainy^ N.S, and B, Chakrabarty 1966, The Legtiminosae of Delhi Some studies on their morphology and Taxonomy Bull. Bot. Sxir, India.8: 25-41, Rau, M.A. 1961. occurrence of Alectra parasitica A, Rich in India A new variety from Banda District U,P. Bull, Bot, Surv. India. 8: 25-27. Rau, M.A. 1969. Flora of the Upper Gangetic plain and of the adjacent Siwalik and Sub-Himalayan Tracts- check list (Suppl.) Bull. Bot. Surv. India 10: 1-87. Sahai, R. and A.B. Sinha 1968. A supplement to the aquatic and swampy vegetation of Gorakhour. Indian For 94: 819-821. Sahni, K.C. and H.B. Naithani 1974. Solanxam sisymbriifolium Lamk. A woody tindershrub new for NOJrth India Acta. Bot. Ind. 2: 151-153, Santapau, H. 1956, The botanical exploration of India Joum. ind. Bot, Soc, 35: 1-6, Santapau, H. 1962, present state of Taxonomy and Floristics in India after independence Bull, Bot, Sur. India 4: 209-216. Sarup, s, i960. Hydrophytes of Bharatpur, Proc. Indian Sci. Congr. 410. Sarup, s. and S.K. Tondon 1962, Vegetation of Bharatpur, Ibid, 322-323. Saxena, A,P. and K.M. Vyas 1978/79. (Dept. Bot. Uni. Saugar, Sagar India). Flora of Bundelkhand, India. 1 The Grasses of Banda and Hamirpur districts (u.P.) Bull, Bot, Soc, uni, Saugar 25/26(0): 73-79, Saxena, H,0. 1967, New plant records from upper Gangetic Plain Indian For. 39(459): 16-19. 13 Shazma* P.C. 1964# A note on the Flora of Lucknow district Bull. Bot. surv. India Vol. 6 No. 1 pp 101. Sharma, V.S. 1958. The flora of Ajmer (Rajasthan) 1. a list of trees, shrubs, and woody, climbers j, Bombay nat. Hist. Soc. 55(1): 129-141. Sharma, V.S. 1973. Kohautia nagporensis (Brace ex. Hains). Saint Et. Merch-An imperfectly known species from upper Gangetic Plain Indian For. 99(3): 159-. Siddiqui, M.O. and S.N. Dixit 1969 . Some intresting Polygonum from Gorakhpur, Bull. Bot. Surv. India 11: 4^2-433. Singh, K.K. 1979. (Bot. Div. C.D.R.I. Lucknow u.P.) New Plant records from district (U.P.) for upper Gangetic Plain Indian J. of For. 2(2): 158-160. Singh, K.K. and R.P.S. Tomar 1982. The aquatic and marshland i flora of Kheri district (U.P.) J. Bombay not Hist. Soc. 79 (2): 261-274, Singh N.P. 1963.' Vivia tetrasperms (Linn) Moench. a new record for upper Gangetic plain Ibia 5: 33-334. Singh, N.P. 1964. Two new distributional records for U.P. plains Ibid 6: 305. Singh, N.P. 1967. Acalypha australis L. an addition to Indian flora. Indian For. 93: 186, Singh, N.P. 1969 Flora of Bull. Bot. Sur, India 11: 1-22. Singh, O.P. and S.K. Singh 1972. Aquatic Angiosperms of Bull, Bot. Soc. Beng. 23: 199-203. Singh, S.K. , D.C. Saini, and O.P. Singh 1979 (1980). scirpus corymbosus, new record for Upper Gangetic Plain, India. Bull. Bot. Soc. Bengal 33(^5): 95-98, Singh, S.K, and S.N, Dixit 1969. Cyperaceae of Jounpur district Bull Bot, soc. Beng. 23: 199-203. Singh, S.K. and S.N. Dixit 1972, Cyperaceae of Gorakhptir district Indian Forester 198: 116-129. Singh, V, 1971(a), Addition to Duthie's Flora of Upper Gangetic. Plain J, Bombay nat. Hist. Soc. 68(2): 339-346, Singh, V. 1971. Common grasses of Meemt Ibid 97: 274-281. 50

Som Deva and CM. Arora 1971, on the occurrence of Tropldia curculiqoides Lindl. at Golatapper, Dehradun." Indian For. 5r(12): 699. Som Deva.and H.3. Naithani 1974, Cyperaceae of Dehradun Valley and the adjacent Siwaliks Indian For. 100(10)x 636-654. Som Deva and H.B. Naithani 1975, Additions to the Cyperaceae of Dehradun Valley and adjacent Siwaliks, Ibid 101 (3): 205. Srivastava* G.D. 1938, Flora of Allahabad Part I & II Uni, Allahabad, Stud. Bot. Sect. 14: 87: 133, 15: 51-127 supplement l Ibid 1-20, 1949. Srivastava, J.G. 1963. Forty seven more grasses from Lucknow, J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 60; 484-488. srivastava, J.G. 1965. A note on the Flora of Mirzapur (U.P.) J. Bom. Nat. Piist. Soc, 53: 152-153, Srivastava, M,P. 1956, Hydrophytes of Sagarlake, Bull, bot. Soc. Saugar 8: 34-37. Srivastava, R.C. 1983, Hiptaqe ccMidicans Hook f. new record for India from Nagaland, j. Econ. Taxon, Bot. 4(3): 939-940. Srivastava, S.K. and S.L. Kapoor 1982. Chlonanthus montanus Bl. (Oleaceae) A new record for Indian flora from Andman and Nicobar island, ceophytology 12(1): 69-72. srivastava, T.N. and S.N. Dixit 1972, New records for Northern India from Gorakhpur, Bull. Bot, Soc. Bengal 26(1):7. srivastava, T.N. 1976. Flora Gorakhpurensis, Delhi. Subramanyain* K. and M.P. Nayar 1971, Plant Taxonomy its past role and future lines of action in India Ibid, 13: 147, Tayal, M.S. and Lalitha Bhasin 1970. Additional notes on the flora of Muzaffamagar, u.P. Bull. Bot. Sur. India 13: 203-207. Thomas, R. Sodeirstrom and Stephen, M. Youg, 1983, A gxxide to collecting Bamboos, Ann. Miss, Bot. Garden 70(1)s 128-136. Trivedi, B.S. and p,c, Sharma 1965, Studies on the hydrophytes of Lucknow and environs Proc, Nat, Acad, Sci. India 35: 1-14. 51

Vaid, K,M, 1964. Aeoinitia Indjca Linn Var, alba santapau, A new record for Notthem India J, Bom. Nat. Hist. Soc. 61(2): 471-472. Venkata Reddy, B. 1969(a). A new plant record for the Upper Gangetic Plain Sci. and Cult. 35(5): 209, Venkata Reddy, B. 1969. Some addition to the flora of Bull. Bot. Sur. India 11: 433-440. Verma, D.M., B.M. Wadhwa and O.P. Misra 1965. Some addition to the flora of Rajasthan Proc, Nat. Acad, Sci. India 35B: 163-170. Verma, 3,I<. and 3,K. Misra 1979. Addition to the flora of Allahabad district (U.P.) Bull. Bot. Sur. India 21(-4): 34-37. Wallich, N. 1329-32. Plantae ASiaticae resiores London 3 vols. Watts, N.A, 1953. Flora of Agra district. A described key to the Flora of Agra district Calcutta.