Local marathi name: Morwel 

Bot. name:   

It is nice to have more than just one or two images of a Clematis (and all other genera) to inspect but most of the 8 images taken are similar, revealing much the same information. PLEASE on future occasions with Clematis at the fruiting stage, can you take close-ups of the foliage including the undersides of the leaves.

It is always much harder to be sure about an identification at the fruiting stage as often reference images are few-and-far-between.

The suggestion of C.heynei does not fit given its known distribution in S.India - as far as I know it has not been recorded from Nepal.

It is known as the 'Deccan Clematis' on the 'Flowers of India' site.

Let us consider Clematis gouriana.

'Flora of Kathmandu Valley' lists 9 species of Clematis including Clematis gouriana which they recorded from 1667-2121m below Phulchoki. Using their key C.gouriana is a possible species but I do not rely upon keys ONLY and one must ALWAYS wonder as to how reliable the information in Floras is. It seems that CURRENTLY the accepted name for what was known as C.gouriana Roxb. ex DC is now Clematis javana.

They assign the local name of 'Junge lahara' to C.gouriana AND other Clematis incl. C.buchananiana and C.montana.

They say C.gouriana is common in mixed forest flowering and fruiting in November. Yet 'Enumeration of the Flowering Plants of Nepal' gives an altitudinal distribution of 500-1600m. So I cannot but wonder IF the Clematis below Phulchoki really is C.gouriana? It MIGHT be.

At present I am uncertain how to distinguish, particularly at the fruiting stage and without close-up images, between C.javana and similar species.

He observes that this species is highly variable with regard to the shape, texture, venation and indumentum of the leaflets.  Apparently specimens from what was Burma approach the leaflets of C.javana....

C.triloba Heyne (now a synonym of C.heynei) is described by Kapoor.

Given my criticism of some works, I have found Kapoor's efforts  of value - extensive and thorough. He examined a lot of herbarium specimens, appears to comment about each Clematis known from India at that time, in a way one can have confidence in.  His written descriptions and the line drawings seem of a high standard

---

I agree not many images from different angles. The plant was situated on a slope without any access. All pictures were shot with 800 zoom lens. That is all I could submit 

---

I quite understand but can I REQUEST all photographers to search for accessible specimens which allow you them to take the necessary close-ups.  And have a camera which can take macro-shots. 

MOST digital compacts have wonderful lenses these days with close-up facilities.  They are light-weight, fitting easily into a short pocket (see my recent post about photographing plants any month of the year).

It is great that members post images and I wish to ENCOURAGE not discourage but unless the images submitted show the necessary detail/characteristics, it can be very difficult to impossible to identify to species.

The same situation exists for traditional pressed specimens for depositing in herbaria - unless one can see the often ESSENTIAL parts of the plant then a reliable identification often cannot be performed.

Furthermore, such images tend not to help others RELIABLY identify the species when checked/compared with.

ONE of the objectives/aspirations of eFI is not just to identify the plants images of which have been sent in but to have a selection of images for EACH species which show CHARACTERISTIC/DIAGNOSTIC features.

In the past it was only economic to take one or two shots per plant, which tended to be 'general' views. 

Even such excellent guides as 'Flowers of the Himalaya' is now so dated photographically and OFTEN does NOT show DIAGNOSTIC characteristics.

Nowadays one can take as many shots per plant as one likes - I OFTEN take 15-20, sometimes 30.

Returning to "inaccessible" flowers.  Yes, particularly in forests, flowers of trees, tall shrubs and tall climbers can be difficult to reach.

Furthermore, there can be 'risks' in such places.  On my first visit to Nepal, I encountered Giant Himalayan Stinging Nettles and leeches for the first time - which make plunging enthusiastically into thick vegetation less appealing!  On my one and only visit to Meghalaya I came alarmingly close to a snake (could not tell if it was venomous or not and I was alone at the time)....

So care needs to be taken but there is no escaping the need to get amongst vegetation and tolerate such unwelcome guests as leeches.

Whilst the closer images, with more of them are welcome - taken in January which is especially pleasing. They may not be sufficient to enable me to 'determine' the specimen.

Having images of the leaves are useful, especially the underside as well.

However, it can be difficult to decide without viewing the flowers.  ANY image whether of flowers, fruits or foliage is informative but characteristics of the fruits are often less well studies. 

I SHALL take a look at my reference material to see if I can narrow things down but it MAY still require views of the flowers.  So PLEASE obtain these, IF you are in a position to later this year.

I realise this all seems rather involved, having taken two sets of photos now, however, for MOST genera, there are few (IF ANY) references for the fruits of a genus and OFTEN no way of reliably distinguishing between them on the basis of fruits alone.

I think it is some Clematis. 

---

Thanks .... Can it be Clemantis terniflora ? 

---

I am not sure at all ... it looks like an ornamental ... may be Clematis flammula. We will have to wait for comments.

---

Ok ...

---

---

Also check for Clematis gouriana .  

Agree with ... good possibility of Clematis gouriana.

But on another thought it looked C.heynei (रानजाई) to me ?

---