Island Morning Glory

Namitha - Thanks for your latest reply.

There are approx. 55 genera within Convolvulaceae but most people just tend to think of Ipomoea.

There are probably close to 2 thousand species altogether and many shrubs and possibly 50 trees and appreciable number of the shrubs and trees are in India / Asia but rarely addressed...

The old time native herbal healers likely know more about the plants than most modern botanists...

The Ipomoea parasitica isn't any more 'parasitic' than the closely related and more common I.tricolor "Heavenly Blue" (and it certainly isn't like anything like a Cuscuta / dodder) but the epithets serve primarily as a unique alphabetical identifier and do not necessarily truly reflect any aspect of the species...e.g., Ipomoea violacea is never really violet or any color close to violet...mostly white and rarely a pale pink...

I look forward to hearing from you at some point via e-mail.

Hi Ron, It's a great thing, that you are tracking out all the wrongly ID ied Morning glory spottings. Very few people would spent so much time,in on stretch, on something like this. I myself am such a person , who start working on something and will not stop until finished, though I am just a beginner in the world of botany [I am only in the third year of my Botany bachelors degree, but my enthusiasm has made me learn so many things, I really have a long way to go, though]. So I can totally understand. It's nice to hear about the Indian project that you worked with.
I went through your suggestions list and, I now have, at least a vague idea of all the morning glories around the world. Maybe, next time I will think thrice before jumping into conclusions when I see one. I didn't know there were so many species. I thought morning glories were all born on vines, but the shrubby variety [I. wolcottiana] seems very interesting. And, this is out of curiosity, is I.parasitica 'parasitic' in anyway, is that why it's called so?.
I will definitely contact you, if I need help.
Thank you very much.

Namitha - Thank you for bringing that comment of mine on the Ipomoea cairica entry to my attention...that was a typographical error (!) , which I have just corrected...

I looked at every single Ipomoea entry and it took over 12 hours and my eyeballs were about to fall out (!)...

I see you are in India...

I was helping out on the Trees of India / Flora of India project with Garg ji and Dinesh ji et al , but I tend to over commit myself to too many different projects and I unfortunately had to take a hiatus from their site...

I'll go back at some point , but I'm sure they are wondering what happened to me...they still e-mail from the group...

I can highly recommend their group as generally , they are very knowledgeable and are very interested in important details...

You can contact me privately if you have any questions that I might be able to help out with...my e-mail is on my homepage here...

Thanks for supporting Science (!)

Hi Ron,Thank you so much for the link. Now, it makes it a lot better to understand. My knowledge about morning glories is very limited. So I tried to understand it, by google image search and Wikipedia. But, expert opinions like yours is not easily available. I am very glad you are part of Project Noah. Now, from seeing these two suggestions, I can totally understand , why this is
I. indica and not any other species.
I have one doubt. I am asking because I am totally lost, trying to differentiate. Why did you say that this is also I.indica [http://www.projectnoah.org/spottings/15176031]. Isn't the leaves there palmate, unlike this one. Will it come as a subspecies of I.indica.
Thank you so much. It's great to have your help.

You are welcome.

Thanks Ron for the additional links.

P.S. - both of the photos linked to were added by the members at my specific request.

namitha - you mentioned "but from the pictures I saw" and I asked you what photos you were referencing because there are so many incorrectly identified photos on the web...

The details that I recognize as obvious in your photo may be too subtle for someone who is unfamiliar with the details of this species and I know from direct experience that it commonly confuses many botanists.

I wish there was a professional site with consistent excellent accurate photo showing all of the important ID features but to the best of my knowledge there is no such site or I would use it all the time...it has been suggested on other sites , that I should be the one to create such a site and frankly , my personal situation isn't going to allow that to happen...

I do not care for wiki or most of the other reference sites because when it comes to Convolvulaceae, frankly...they are frequently 'lost in space'...

I can link to photos where I believe most of them to be accurate and the site is also used by the USDA when they link to a photo that they believe to be accurate.

Here are photos of Ipomoea indica as entered in the PlantFiles (and I did do much to get these in order when I was trying to help that site):

Ipomoea indica -The following 2 photo show excellent views of the calyx sepals
http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showima...
http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showima...

Hope that helps...

As experts we always should add a reference link, since we all want to learn as well by looking at and re-searching an ID.

Thank you Smith Zoo. I also thought, it would have been easier with a reference link.

Hi Namitha, I don't think you offended Ron. It will make the process of ID'ing easier if one can provide a link for users with little experience in a certain field. I believe Ron is a professional and stating the information in the comment box does make for a good track record. Ron, perhaps you can suggest a reliable link?

Hi Ron Kushner,
I didn't mean to offend you, in any way. I am really sorry, if I did. I was confused, since you didn't suggest any references. I totally acknowledge your knowledge in this field. Thank you so much for the help.

P.S. - I am here to offer my assessment and anyone is free to accept or reject that assessment...but I do like to have my assessment clearly stated for the historical record...

What pictures are you looking at for reference (?)...that seems to be a big part of the mis-identification issues on this site , as the reference photos on many sites are wrong.

You have to know what to look for and the clusters of calices / sepals are distinctive in Ipomoea indica and that is what I see in your photo...if a person is unfamiliar with this species (and not having grown and examined it in detail in person) I can understand why there would be hesitation...

I have grown Ipomoea indica from strains around the world and studied them in detail and yes I am very sure that the photo you have posted here is Ipomoea indica.

Hi Ron Kushner, Are you sure, this is Ipomea indica. I am not sure if it is Ipomea purpurea, but from the pictures I saw, I don't think it is I.indica either.

Thank you so much for the ID Ron. I was not sure of the species name.

It's Ipomoea indica.