Angiopteris helferiana or Angiopteris indica

 
 
https://08511630493324166816.googlegroups.com/attach/7447d73db8478c14/angio%20evec%20-%20Copy.JPG?part=0.1&view=1&vt=ANaJVrH4x0wDepud8cxGy6GHe3r_FswK-UL42cIMDcE-fKnD0LYxUyGn96O-TYUroJg1C9eG4ut0WTFRvZYmdMzcoiu-cxIf1seMMDZA_j_P8Rl72xcIMgw
 
Angiopteris evecta (G. Forst.) Hoffm SN DEC 05 : 7 posts by 5 authors. Attachments (1).
Angiopteris evecta (G. Forst.) Hoffm, wild fern from Gudalur area of Nilgiris Tamilnadu at an altitude of 1400m
The fern uploaded seems to be Angiopteris evecta
I hope this sp. may be Angiopteris helferiana C.Presl. According to Dr. Chris Fraser-Jenkins Angiopteris evecta (G. Forst.) Hoffm is not found in India. Here is my earlier upload and find World Fern Expert Dr. Chris Fraser-Jenkins's comment and notes.

Angiopteris helferiana C.Presl is an unresolved name according to plant list. In my earlier paper also it is identified as Angiopteris evecta only


I think it would be better if we concentrate on differences between two species to resolve. A species being listed as unresolved by the Plant List has no meaning. It only shows their limitations, not reflection on status of any species.
In the Nilgiris there are two species (as in most of India), A. helferiana and A. indica - they differ subtly in various ways, but one obvious feature is the distance of the sori from the edge - helferiana has slightly to markedly submarginal sori, and in indica they are always marginal (but beware as an exposed helferiana can have just about marginal sori - but not the other way round). Your photo does not show the diagnostic features of the sori - not knowing what is needed to see. So I can't tell which one it is from a general habit photo of the whole plant. Both have very short, almost no recurrent false veins coming in from the margin between the veins, only just reaching the inside of the soral line.
The third species is confined to far N.E. India - mostly Arunachal Pradesh, plus Assam State and S.E. Bhutan. I only discovered it in about 2009 when I was able to go to Itanagar, as there was then no Indian material of it in herbaria world-wide. So at first I feared it might be unnamed, then in the Philippines I found it is the same as what they call A. palmiformis there - it is a huge one with rather cordate-based segments and long false veins, reaching near to the segment midrib. Recently in Berkeley herbarium, California, I was able to see a lot of the Pacific island species, A. evecta - and found that the Arunachal plant and A. palmiformis are really the same as true A. evecta, and that it comes up S.E. Asia, via S. China and Myanmar and just gets into far N.E. India as a rarity. So now we can no longer say A. evecta is not present in India - but it is very restricted and little known - and it is not the ones we get in the central Indo-Himalaya (Sikkim, Darjeeling, Nepal etc. or Meghalaya) or S. India, Sri Lanka etc.
Hope this may help clear it up - its a big mess with wrong names in the new Flora of China account, which is very mistaken re the names for the two common Indian species (thus also in China)!


 
 
 
Comments