chapter 2 review of literature -...

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2. Review of literature

7

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The first botanical excursion to the state Jammu and Kashmir was made

during 1819-1825 by a British veterinary surgeon Dr. William Moorcroft who

collected specimens from Ladakh. Victor Jacquemont was first to visit the Kashmir

valley in 1831 followed by G.T. Vigne, Carl Von Huegel, etc. The first floristic

account of Jammu and Kashmir was given by John Forbs Royle (1833-39) in his

publication “Illustrations of the Botany and other branches of the natural History of

the Himalayan Mountains and of the Flora of Cashmere”. It was Thomson (1847)

who also gave a general vegetational account of the valley.

Some other important contributions on the floristics of the region are that of

Lawrence (1895), Stewart (1916-1917), Singh (1970), Javeid (1971), Dhar and

Kachroo (1983), Naqshi, et al. (1984), Navchoo and Kachroo (1987), Kachroo

(1993), Dar et al. (2002), Singh et al. (2002) and Khuroo et al. (2007).

2.1. Cytological review

The chromosome number determination and the study of meiotic course is an

important exertion and a platform for future applied researches. Chromosome number

review for the presently covered species has been compiled from various chromosome

atlases such as Darlington and Wylie (1955), Fedorov (1969), Ornduff (1968, 1969),

Moore (1967-1971, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1972, 1973-1974), Löve and Löve (1982a,b,

1986), Goldblatt (1981, 1984,1985, 1988), Goldblatt and Johnson (1990, 1991, 1994,

1996, 1998, 2000, 2003), Kumar and Subramanian (1986), Khatoon and Ali (1993).

Besides, IAPT/IOPB Chromosome Reports and journals were consulted and the

website of IPCN- mobot.mobot.org/W3T/Search/ipcn.html was visited.

Classical cytological studies have shown that many experimentally produced

auto and allopolyploids produce chromosomally variable gametes and progeny (Poole

1933; Davis 1943). A number of previous chromosome studies in Angiosperms have

unveiled the role of chromosomal evolution through numerical changes (euploidy and

aneuploidy) and structural aberrations (Stebbins 1950; Ornduff et al. 1963; Heywood

et al. 1977; Robinson et al. 1981).

The family wise review on chromosome and meiotic studies is given as

follows with main focus on the three major gamopetalous families studied at present

i.e. Asteraceae, Lamiaceae and Scrophulariaceae.


8

2.1.1. Asteraceae

It was Juel (1900) who made the chromosome counts in the family for the first time.

A superficial review reveals that work on cytology of the family Asteraceae started

with the beginning of 20th century. Some pioneer contributions in the field of cytology

and chromosome number reports in Asteraceae include Raven et al. (1960), Ornduff

et al. (1967); King et al. (1976), etc. Heywood et al. (1977) presented a compilation

“Biology and Chemistry of the Compositae” covering 13 tribes of the family along

with cytological data. Pinkava and Keil (1977) reported the chromosomes numbers in

122 species of Asteraceae covering 61 genera and gave Generic status to Carminatia.

In their continuing efforts, Powell et al. (1974) gave the chromosome reports in 102

species of 45 genera covering 9 tribes of the Family. With the help of chromosome

counts and morphology, Peng and Hsu (1978) reported the chromosome counts in 76

taxa covering 47 genera of Taiwan Compositae. Through chromosomal studies

McArthur et al. (1981) gave the evidence of autopolyploidy in the subgenus

Tridentatae of genus Artemisia. From Pakistan, the chromosome number study by

Razaq et al. (1994) is a commendable work in the family in which 82 taxa of 48

genera are cytologically worked out adding several reports at world level. Watanabe

et al. (1995) made cytological efforts in the family and determined chromosome

numbers in 53 species covering 25 genera, besides shedding light on evolution of tribe

Eupatorieae in this context. In one of their excellent works Carr et al. (1999) collected

plant specimens from Africa, Mexico and America and reported the chromosome

numbers in 66 species of 13 tribes of Compositae in which 4 genera were reported

cytologically for the first time. From Iran, chromosome numbers in several species of

Centaurea have been published (Khaniki 1995; Ghaffari 1999), besides karyotypic

studies in some species (Sheidai et al. 2000). From the same country, Sheidai et al.

(2006) carried out meiotic studies, chromosome paring and chiasma frequency on 11

species of Cousinia reporting 9 species cytologically for the first time. Valles et al.

(2005), from Spain, determined chromosome numbers in tribes Anthemideae and

Inuleae covering 17 species and 19 species respectively. Semple and Watanabe (2009)

reviewed and compiled chromosome number database to prepare a phylogenetic tree

in the family.

Cytological analysis in Artemisia from Armenia and Iran revealed some new

and rare chromosome counts (Torrel & Valles 2001). Jackson et al. (2002) while

studying the cytology of Haplopappus gracilis (n=2) showed the chromosome

specific desynapsis in the species. Kreitschitz and Vallès (2003), reported some rare


9

chromosome counts and aneusomaty (aneuploid numbers within same individual) in

some taxa of Artemisia from Poland. With the help of cytological studies in several

species of Artemisia, Pellicer et al. (2008) correlated the genome size with

morphological traits and evolution in the genus. In the same genus from Turkey, 12

species have been recently given the chromosome numbers with B-s in Artemisia

incana (Tabur et al. 2012)

Chromosome studies have been significantly contributing to the grouping of

the plant taxa and thus cytotaxonomy remains as one of the convincing approaches in

the plant systematics. Karyomorphology and chromosome numbers in 6 species of

Vernonia were used for the cytotaxonomic contributions in this genus (de Oliviera et

al. 2007). de Oliveira et al. (2012) through chromosome number and karyotyping of

the same genus Vernonia from Brazil discussed its generic status. Similar works in

this context as far as the family is concerned are Mansanares et al. (2007), Ren and

Yuan (2010), Salles-de-Melo et al. (2010), to mention few. Polyploidy has played an

important role in the evolution of the family as has been affirmed in various

cytological studies (Bowers et al. 2003; Mayrose et al. 2010; Meng et al. 2010).

Utilizing molecular cytogenetic techniques, Chester et al. (2011) showed a lot of

chromosomal variability in recently formed natural allopolyploid Tragopogon

miscellus arising through aneuploidy and translocations. Similarly Li et al. (2011)

while investigating a large number of individuals of Aster ageratoides var. pendulus

showed a continuous chromosome number variability from 2n=60-92 and attributes

this to the combined effect of hybridization, recent origin and high levels of

polyploidy. In Echinops chromosome numbers determination through orcein

technique and genome size estimation through flow cytometry has been carried out

recently in 14 populations of 9 taxa by Sanchez-Jimenez et al. (2012). They

concluded that genome size and chromosome number are crucial parameters for

deciphering lineage diversification within the genus Echinops.

In the earlier times, taxa from America, Russia and Africa received more

attention in this field. But in the Indian Compositae, the cytological studies started

quite late, with the first chromosome number report in the cultivated species

Carthamus tinctorius (2n=24) by Patel and Narayana (1935). The other cytological

studies on the members of this family in India were those by Mitra (1947), Kishore


10

(1951), Singh (1951), Shetty (1964), Mathew (1977). Much of the cytological work of

Shetty (1964, 1967) was centered to Himalayan Compositae. The work of Mehra et

al. (1965), was more comprehensive who gave the chromosome reports of 134 species

covering 63 genera from North and South India. Khoshoo and Sobti (1958) studied

the chromosome counts in several species of Indian Artemisia. Mehra and

Remanandan (1974, 1975, 1976), Remanandan and Mehra (1974) also made the

significant cytological contributions from these areas. Gupta et al. (1972) while

working on the Compositae from U.P. reported the chromosome numbers in 17

species under 6 tribes of the family. Singh (1972) worked on the cytological

exploration of taxa from Bihar. Cytlogical studies on East and West Indian plant

species were carried out by Sharma and Sarkar (1967-1968), and Subramanyam and

Kamble (1966, 1967), on North and Central Indian plant species by Gill and Gupta

(1979), Gill et al. (1980), (Gupta & Gill 1979, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1989) and Gupta et

al. (1989), and from Punjab plains by Gupta and Gill (1983). Mathew and Mathew

(1988) carried out cytological studies in South Indian Compositae. Gupta et al. (1989)

gave a chromosomal conspectus in West Himalayan Compositae. Jose and Mathew

(1995) studied the chromosome numbers in several members of South Indian

Heliantheae. Gupta et al. (2010a) undertook cytomorphological analysis of tribe

Senecioneae from Western Himalaya and discussed various meiotic abnormalities and

reported B-chromosomes in a few cases, besides reporting some species cytologically

for the first time. Recent work regarding the cytomorphology of Gamopetalae

covering a number of species of Asteraceae from Himachal Pradesh, India has been

carried out by Bala and Gupta (2011a). From the same region Gupta et al. (2012)

while reporting cytologically several species of Gamopetalae covered 12 members of

Asteraceae too.

Karyotypic studies have also played a significant contribution to the

cytological and evolutionary understanding of the family. Some of the pioneer works

in this aspect are that of Togby (1943), Moore and Frankton (1962), Huzirawa (1965),

a few to mention. Karyotypic study by Togby (1943) in the genus Crepis helped him

to formulate that base number x=6 is derived from x=4 through reduction due to

deletion and reciprocal translocations Karyotypes of 17 species under 6 tribes was

reviewed by Arano (1965). Tribe Cichorieae has been well studied in this aspect

(Stebbins et al. 1953; Edmonds et al. 1974).


11

From Kashmir there is some previous work in the field of cytology in the

family Asteraceae at species or genus level. Some earlier chromosome counts in the

family were given by Koul (1964 a), Koul and Gohil (1973), Bhat et al. (1974), Koul

and Wakhlu (1976). Jee et al. (1983) reported chromosome counts in some species of

Saussurea from Razdaan Pass and Gurez. Kaul and Bakshi (1984) undertook the

cytological study of Artemisia from North-west Himalaya including the species from

Kashmir. They presented some new reports of 2n=3x= 27 for A. glauca. Further they

have reported some new ploidy levels in A. vulgaris and A. roxburghiana complexes.

From the same area B-chromosomes and their impact on chiasma frequency has been

reported in A. maritima (Bakshi & Kichloo 1985). Jee et al. (1989) while studying the

cytogeography of endemic taxa of Kashmir Himalaya reported chromosome counts in

11 species of Asteraceae.

2.1.2. Lamiaceae

The pioneer work on chromosome number in Lamiaceae, probably started with

Mentha when Ruttle (1931) reported the chromosome numbers in some of its species.

In the same period several species of Salvia were cytologically worked out (Scheel

1931; Sugiura 1931). Some other ancient chromosome reports in the family include

Tischler (1934) and Junell (1937) on Mentha, Stewart (1939) on Salvia, etc. Towards

this economically important family with several medicinal and aromatic species,

cytologists paid much of their attention and kept on adding chromosome reports.

Morton (1962) from Britain comprehensively studied the chromosome reports in

several species of Coleus, Hyptis, Mentha, Plectranthus, etc. In other Labiates from

the same area, Morton (1973) gave chromosome reports of 47 species. Boscaiu et al.

(1998) reported chromosome numbers in several Lamiaceae from Spain. Diao et al.

(2009) analyzed five varieties of Perilla frutescens through cytological and molecular

techniques. They reported same chromosome number 2n=40 in all varieties and

clustered these into 2 clades on molecular basis. Yang et al. (2009) presented the

chromosome numbers in 10 species of Salvia from China and supported the base

number x=8 in the genus. From Turkey Martin et al. (2011a) cytologically reported

26 taxa covering 14 of Stachys, among which 24 taxa are reported for the first time.

Martin et al. (2011b) carried out karyological studies in 7 taxa of Clinopodium and 9

taxa of Micromeria from Turkey and reported 12 taxa cytologically for the first time.

Chromosome number and genome size estimation by flow cytometry in Callicarpa


12

has been carried out that support x=17 as base number, besides indicating

polyploidization events in the genus (Contreras & Ruter 2011).

From India, a lot of cytological work has been done in the family starting from

Gill (1970, 1971a, 1971b, 1971c), Mehra and Gill (1972), Bhattacharya (1976, 1978a,

b), Vij and Kashyap (1976a), Singh and Sharma (1981a, b, 1982), Saggoo and Bir

(1983a, 1985, 1986). Haque (1981) documented the chromosome numbers in 17

species of Salvia from West Bengal and concluded that chromosome numbers range

from 2n=12 to 64. Bir and Saggoo (1982) carried out cytological investigations in 16

economically important species from Central India. Bir and Saggoo (1985) carried out

chromosomal analysis of 33 species of Lamiaceae from South India and indicated

23.53 per centt polyploidy in the family. Thoppil and Jose (1995) carried out the

cytological and biochemical analysis in Leucas vestita. In a more comprehensive

effort, Thoppil (1993) studied the chromosome number, karyomorphology and

biochemical analysis of South Indian Lamiaceae. Among 54 species in his study, he

reported 12 cytotypes in Ocimum, 8 cytotypes in Coleus, 5 in Leucas and 4 each in

Pogostemon and Salvia and observed the ploidy levels ranging in the family from 2x

to 8x. Saggoo et al. (2011) cytologically worked out 14 species of Nepeta from

Western Himalaya with some new reports. Bala and Gupta (2011b) while working on

cytological investigations of Bicarpellatae, reported the chromosome numbers in 20

species of Lamiaceae from Kangra district of H.P. (Western Himalaya).

From Kashmir, Gill (1969) studied the chromosome numbers in several

species of Lamiaceae collected from Gulmarg, Tangmarg, Khillanmarg areas, etc.

Sobti (1962, 1965) have reported the various cytotypes of Mentha longifolia form

Kashmir. Koul and Wakhlu (1976) reported the chromosome number in Salvia

moorcroftiana. Gohil et al. (1981) cytologically covered several species under genera

Calamintha, Mentha, Nepeta, Phlomis, etc. Similarly Jee et al. (1983, 1985)

documented the chromosome reports in some species of Nepeta, Phlomis, Salvia and

Stachys.

2.1.3. Scrophulariaceae

There have been a number of taxonomic revisions in the family and many genera are

now transferred to other families like Orobanchaceae, Plantaginaceae, etc. supported

by molecular phylogenies. One of the oldest noteworthy cytological examinations is


13

that of Hambler (1954) who compared the chromosome number and chromosome

morphologies among several species in the family. Vaarama and Hursalmi (1967)

undertook chromosome studies in some old world species of Scrophularia. The

complexity in the intra-familiar characters and relationship of its various members

with other families tempted a number of scientists, as a result of which a large number

of cytological examination have been carried out in this family. There are a number of

cytotaxonomic works on various species of Veronica (Fischer, 1967, 1973; Ferakova,

1976; Fernandes-Casas, 1977; Aryavand, 1987; Ghaffari 1987). Rongfu et al. (1996)

studied karyomorphology in 6 species of Pedicularis from Qinghai-Xizhan

Plateau and discussed their evolutionary status. In order to throw light on speciation

and phylogenetic relationships of the genus Pedicularis, karyotype and chromosomal

analyses were carried out (Amano, 1999; Cai et al. 2004). Steiner (1996) utilized

chromosome numbers for taxonomic relationships in tribe Hemimerideae. Mehrvarz

and Kharabian (2005) while giving chromosome reports of 10 Veronica species from

Iran, delimited subspecific taxa in Veronica hederifolia on ploidy level basis. Based

on karyomorphological and morphological studies in 13 species of Pedicularis from

China, Jie et al. (2004) discussed intrageneric relationships in the genus.

From India the cytologists who worked initially on the family are Verma and

Dhillon (1967), Mehra and Gill (1968), Mehra and Vasudevan (1972), Vij and

Kashyap (1975), to mention a few. Pal and Pal (1971) carried out meiotic and mitotic

studies in Lindenbergia indica and Mazus japonicus and threw light on phylogenetic

relationships with the help of karyotypic diversity and variable chromosome numbers.

From North India, Vij and Kashyap (1976b) reported 14 taxa under 10 genera

cytologically, including intraspecific aneuploidy in Verbascum thapsus (2n=34, 36),

Antirrhinum orontium (2n=14, 16) and intraspecific euploidy in Antirrhinum majus

(2n=16, 32), Veronica anagallis (2n=18, 36, 54) and both polyploidy and aneuploidy

in Vandellia crustacea (2n=14, 28, 32, 42). From the South India, Chandran and

Bhavanandan (1986) carried out detailed cytological study in 6 taxa of genus

Limnophila. Similarly, Subramanian and Pondmudi (1987) from the same region

made cytological studies in 21 taxa of the family, including karyotyping of 18 species

and observed a high order karyotype asymmetry. Saggoo and Srivastava (2009),

studied meiotic course in 5 species of Pedicularis from cold deserts of Himachal

Pradesh. Raina et al. (2010) studied the chromosome number and reproductive


14

behavior in endangered medicinal plant Picrorhiza kurroa from H.P., India. Recently

Bala and Gupta (2011b) carried out cytological exploration in Bicarpellatae of North

India covering 6 species from Scrophulariaceae with some new chromosome reports.

From Kashmir, cytological studies have covered a small number of species in

the family viz. Linaria dalmatica (Vasudevan 1975; Koul & Wakhlu 1976), Mazus

japonocus (Koul et al. 1976), Pedicularis spp. (Bhat et al. 1975; Jee et al. 1987),

Verbascum thapsus (Gohil et al. 1981), etc.

2.1.4. Others

The prominent cytologists who worked on the cytological exploration of

Gentianaceae include Rork (1946, 1949), Favarger (1949, 1952), Skalinska (1952),

Love (1953), etc. Besides giving chromosome numbers for many species in the

family, they contributed to cytotaxonomy by classifying Gentiana, Gentianella, etc.

into sections on the basis of basic chromosome numbers e.g. Gentiana sect. Coelanthe

Griseb. (x=5), G. sect. Pneumonanthe Neck. (x=11, 13), G. sect. Aptera Kusnez.

(x=7, 13) and Gentianella sect. Andicola Griseb. (x=6), G. sect. Crossopetalum Froel.

(x=11, 13). Broome (1978) studied the chromosome numbers and meiosis in 17

species of Gentiana sect.Chondrophyllae native to North and Central America. Hair

et al. (1980) documented chromosome numbers in 18 species of Gentiana from Nea

Zealand. Küpfer and Yuan (1996) made karyological studies in 15 species from

China, mainly showing 2n=20 and karyotyping revealed mostly metacentric

chromosomes. Besides, they discussed mechanism of chromosomal evolution in this

sect. Documenting chromosome numbers in 35 species of Gentianaceae, Yuan et al.

(1998) threw light on chromosomal evolution and basic numbers in the family.

Kissling et al. (2008) gave chromosome numbers in 60 species of tribe Exacae from

Africa with most possible base numbers as x=7, 8, 9 and also pointed to active state of

speciation. do Pico and Dematteis (2010) studied cytopalynology in Centaureum

pulchellum on population basis from Argentina and observed chromosomal

irregularities and suggested its autopolyploid nature.

From India the pioneer chromosome work in the family was undertaken by

Mehra and Gill (1968), Vasudevan (1975) from Western Himalaya, and

Subramanyam and Kamble (1966) from South India.


15

From Kashmir the cytological contributors in the several species of family are

that of Khoshoo and Tandon (1963), Khoshoo et al. (1966), Koul and Gohil (1973),

Gohil et al. (1981). Jee et al. (1985, 1989) while working on the cytological

exploration of flora of Kashmir, covered several species from the family

Gentianaceae.

Some prominent cytological studies in the family Primulaceae include Kress

(1969), Probatova and Seledets (2008), besides, there are some contributions to

cytotaxonomy in the family (Shen et al. 2009; Abou-El-Enain, 2006) based on

chromosome number and morphological characters. From India Sharma and Sarkar

(1967-68), Sharma (1970), and Chatterjee et al. (1989) documented some

chromosome reports in Androsace.

Some of the reports on chromosome numbers in Campanulaceae include

Gadella (1964), Kovanda (1966), Phitos and Kamari (1988), Abou-El-Enain (2006),

etc. From India the piooners in cytology of this family are Kishore (1951), Sarkar et

al. (1976). Kashmir Himalayan Campanulaceae has been covered under the

cytological contributions by Jee et al. (1989) who cytologically reported some species

of Campanula and Codonopsis from the region.

Wu and Tanksley (2010) studied the chromosomal evolution in Solanaceae by

reviewing earlier chromosomal data and chromosomal changes. In this economically

important family much cytological attention has been made to Solanum nigrum

complex. Evolution of chromosome 6 in Solanum spp. has been studied by Lou et al.

(2010) by molecular technique like comparative FISH mapping. From India pioneer

cytological work in the family particularly in Solanum includes Bhaduri (1933),

Tandon and Rao (1966), Bhattacharya et al. (1971), to mention few. More recently

abnormal meiotic course has been observed in Datura metel by Choudhary (2000).

From North India Singhal and Kumar (2008) reported cytotypes in important

medicinal plant Withania somnifera and impact of meiotic abnormality on its

reproductive potential. From Kashmir, the cytological reports in the family include

that of Jee et al. (1983) for Atropa acuminata, Koul & Wakhlu (1976) for Datura

stramonium, Mehra & Sobti (1954) and Gohil et al. (1981) for Hyoscyamus niger.

Chromosome number and pollen morphology was studied in North American

Plantaginaceae by Bassett and Crompton (1968) covering 29 species. Mohsenzadeh et


16

al. (2008) worked on cytology of 15 species of Plantago from Iran. Murray et al.

(2010) while studying 58 individuals of Plantago native to Nea Zealand, reported new

chromosome counts with some novel cytotypes (2n=12x=72) in 4 species. From India

Vasudevan (1976) reported diploid, triploid and hexaploid cytotypes in Plantago

major, besides giving chromosome reports in some other species. Other chromosome

reports in the family from India include Sareen et al. (1994), Dhar et al. (2006).

Recently, Bala and Gupta (2011c) reported diploid (2n=12) and tetraploid (2n=24)

cytotypes in Plantago major from North India. Besides, they reported tetraploid and

hexaploid reports in Plantago depressa with 0-1B-chromosomes in tetraploid

cytotype and compared the morphological variability in these different cytotypes.

From Kashmir Plantaginaceae has been worked out by Koul and Gohil (1967, 1973),

Munshi et al. (1994, 1995), etc.

Hounsell (1968) reported the chromosome number in 6 species of

Caprifoliaceae. Chromosome studies were made in 6 taxa of Caprifoliaceae by

Zhang et al. (2002), besides discussing phylogentic position of Heptocodon. Denda et

al. (2007) gave first time chromosome count for Lonicera japonica var.

miyagusukiana, besides discussing its origin. Koul and Gohil (1973) during their

cytological studies covered few species of Caprifoliaceae from Kashmir.

Family Rubiaceae is chromosomally very diverse and some prominent cytological

references on the family are of Lewis (1962) for North America, Kiehn and Lorence

(1996) for Hawaii, Puangsomlee and Puff (2001) for Thailand, Correa et al. (2004)

for Brazil, etc. From Himalaya, Mehra and Khosla (1973) cytologically worked out

several members of the family. From North and Central India, Bedi et al. (1981)

carried out chromosome number study and palynology in 24 woody species of this

family revealing stable base number, x=11. Sidhu et al. (1983) reported the

chromosome count of 2n=22 in Galium aparine from North India.

Cytological work on Boraginacae is scarce, the main reason being very small

size of pollen mother cells. The most comprehensive chromosome study in the family

probably remains the work of Britton (1951) who undertook mitotic study in 170

collections, covering 24 genera and 100 species. A karyological study in Spanish

Boraginaceae was undertaken by Luque and Valdes (1986). There are cytological

studies on several taxa from different parts of the world viz. Lappula (Riedl 1996),


17

Nonnea (Selvi & Bigazzi 2002), Borago (Selvi et al. 2006). From India Mehra &

Vasudevan (1972), Vasudevan (1975) and Sharma & Dhakre (1981) have given the

chromosome reports in some members of the family.

Some chromosome reports for less represented families in Kashmir have also

been published before which include Convolvulaceae (Khoshoo & Sachdeva 1961;

Koul & Gohil 1973), Dipsacaceae (Gohil et al. 1981; Jee et al. 1989), Polemoniaceae

(Bhat et al. 1975), Valerianaceae (Mehra & Sobti 1955), etc.

The cytomorphological work on Western Himalaya, India is still gaining

momentum as there are certain areas that are cytologically unexplored and need to be

explored in order to have complete genome evaluation of the flora. In this concern

recent and significant work is being done on Angiosperm species by Department of

Botany, Punjabi University covering several families. Some of these efforts include

Singhal and Kumar (2008) on Solanaceae, Sharma et al. (2008) and Bala and Gupta

(2011d) on Solanaceae, Gupta et al. (2009), on some Angiosperms, Gupta et al.

(2010a,b) on Asteraceae, Bala et al. (2011, 2012) on Monochlamydeae and

Asteraceae respectively, Singhal et al. (2011) on Boraginaceae, Kumar and Singhal

(2011, 2012) on Ranunculaceae, Sharma et al. (2012) on Apiaceae, to mention few.

Similarly the recent cytological work on Kashmir flora includes Jeelani et al. (2011,

2012) respectively on Caryophyllaceae and other Polypetalous members, Saggoo and

Farooq (2011a, b) on Euphorbiaceae and Polygonaceae,

2.2. ETHNOBOTANY

Due to varied climate and geographical ranges from tropical to Alpine, India is a rich

land of diverse medicinal and aromatic flora with important phytogeographic regions

like Eastern and Western Himalaya. The traditional use of herbs for relieving various

ailments has been practiced by the people since time immemorial. India is famous

over world for its Ayurvedic Medicine System that utilizes herbal plants for the cure

of various ailments from common cold to cancer. Owing to this a huge number of

papers have been published from India, covering precious floral wealth of the region.

At present, only some papers from the study area are discussed. Kashmir located in

the lap of Northwest Himalaya harbours a number of such medicinally important

plants. Many of these are endemic to this region, because of unique climate and varied

topography. Hakeems of the region have been administering local herbs to people for


18

a number of ailments and thus played a significant role in the health care system.

There is rich ethnicity within Kashmir and different ethnic groups of different

locations particularly Gujjars have a lot of information about plants’ uses which they

aquire from their ancestors. A number of workers have previously gathered

information on ethnomedicinal uses of the various native plant species and suggested

further necessity for the documentation of floral wealth. Bhattacharyya (1991)

surveyed Ladakh region and documented 56 economically important species. Naqshi

et al. (1992) presented ehtnobotanical uses of over 100 species of Kashmir Himalaya.

Ethnomedicinal information for the use in nutritional purposes was collected by

Navchoo and Buth (1994) for seven native herbs viz. Allium victoralis, Caralluma

tuberculata, Dioscorea pentaphylla, Dipsacus inermis, Phytolacca acinosa,

Polygonum alpinum and Pueraria tuberosa. From Gurez Valley, it was Singh (1994)

who conducted ethnobotanical survey of this area and reported eighty six species used

by Dards (Gurez people) in various ailments. A more comprehensive approach by

Kaul (1997) in the form of a Book is worth mentioning wherein he documented 111

medicinal plants of Kashmir and Ladakh with distribution, Local name, parts used

besides morphological features. A survey of the Gujjar and Bakerwal tribes

documents use of ten species viz Achillea millefolium, Aconitum heterophyllum,

Allium sativum, Brassica campestris, Cannabis sativa, Datura stramonium,

Hyoscyamus niger, Lawsonia inermis, Punica granatum and Urtica dioica in the

tooth problems (Ganai & Nawchoo 2003). During their survey to Uri region (Khan et

al. 2004) have mentioned indigenous uses of 27 plant species. Masood and Shafi

(2005) surveyed the state Jammu and Kashmir and prepared a data base documented

ethnomedicinal information on ~133 plant species of the area. Similarly 20 plant

species have been enlisted from Lolab Valley of North Kashmir used against skin

diseases (Lone et al. 2009). Ashraf et al. (2009) gave an assessment of several

medicinal plants of Kashmir. Malik et al. (2011a) in their survey to Kashmir

Himalaya mentioned some ethnomedicinally important species with new uses. In their

survey to North Kashmir (Malik et al. 2011b) gave more comprehensive information

on ethnomedicinal uses and conservation of 80 plant species under 43 families.

Recently Ahmed et al. (2012) have shown that in some ethnomedicinal species, the

presence of endophytic microbes like fungi as symbionts help the former in

stimulating secondary metabolite production which are in turn biologically active and

make the plant species more useful in healthcare system. Many of the ethnomedicinal


19

plants have scientifically been proved to be important for health care by modern

pharmacologies as the active principles have been isolated from a large number of

such species. Since most of these ethnomedicinal plants are either rare or threatened

(Malik et al. 2011b) due to overexploitation without proper steps of their conservation

which is a serious matter of concern to prevent this wealth for sustainable use.

chapter 2 review of literature -...

Documents