NATIONAL SEMINAR ON THE ROLE OF BOTANICAL SURVEY OF INDIA AND ZOOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA IN THE NEXT MILLENNIUM
Ministry of Environment & Forests
Government of India
17-18 March, 1999
Recommendations of the working groups
List of participants
The Botanical Survey of India and the Zoological Survey of India are the premier survey organisations of the country engaged in the survey and inventorization of floral and faunal resources of the country. International developments in recent years, including adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992, have necessitated an assessment of work done by BSI and ZSI for reorienting these premier institutions to meet the emerging challenges of the coming century for survey, identification, monitoring, and conservation of biological diversity. ln context of this background the Ministry of Environment & Forests had organised a two day National seminar on 17-19 March 1999 at New Delhi.
The Hon’ble Minister of Environment and Forests, Shri. Suresh P. Prabhu, inaugurated the Seminar on 17th March, 1999. About 70 experts from all over India, including Dr. T.N. Khoshoo, Dr. Saldhana, Prof. M.S. Jairajpuri, Prof. C.R. Babu, Prof. T.N. Ananthakrishnan, participated in the deliberations for assessing the work done by BSI and ZSI and identifying critical gap areas. In order to reorient BSI and ZSI to face the challenge of the coming century the participants divided themselves into seven Working Groups. The themes of these Workmg Groups were: Stock taking and future strategy - BSI; Stock taking and future strategy - ZSI; Conservation of threatened species; Microorganisms; Database; Networking; and Restructuring of BSI and ZSI. Detailed background papers were prepared to facilitate the discussions.
During the Seminar eminent experts deliberated in great detail for formulation of a pragmatic Action Plan which would galvanize these two institutions with special reference to future strategies, networking, identification of gap areas, strategies for rehabilitation, ex-situ and in-situ conservation, coverage of microorganisms and development of multipurpose databases. In all, 108 recommendations emanated in this context.
The important recommendations emanating from the Seminar are as follows:
Working Group I & II: Stocktaking and Future Strategy - BSI & ZSI
The working group I, which took stock of work done by Botanical Survey of India identified strengths and weaknesses of Botanical Survey of India, made several important recommendations regarding future strategies. The Group felt that the strength of the Survey lay in the areas of Taxonomic studies of flowering plants and nomenclature of higher plants, identification of rare and threatened species. It also serves as national repository of type collections and voucher specimens of India’s plant diversity. It identified the weaknesses of Botanical Survey of India in the areas of population studies, molecular systematics, genome studies and holistic studies on plant-animal interactions.
The Group also felt that the Botanical Survey of India had an extremely adverse ratio of scientists vis a vis supporting staff leading to serious managerial problems, which called for steps to optimise the ratio. It felt that interns and research scholars should form the bulk of the work force. It recommended greater decentralisation and identification of thrust areas for each of the regional centres, which should have specific theme and mission.
Talking of future strategies, the Group emphasised importance of taxonomy of micro-organisms. It recommended that for the purpose of surveys, phytogeographic approach should be followed rather than an approach which follows politically demarcated boundaries and also recommended sampling strategies based on advanced technologies like GIS, GPS and remote sensing. The Group further recommended that the services rendered by the organisation should not be free of cost and a certain fee should be levied to generate revenue for the organisation, and also emphasised need for regulating information to prevent rampant plagiarisation. It also made important recommendations for image building.
The group II, which took stock of work done by ZSI, emphasised the need to launch a national programme on mapping the spatial distribution of faunal diversity, and to take up studies on identification of micro-habitats for ecogeographic classification. The group felt that there was a need to consolidate the baseline data and clear the backlog of unidentified collections. Need for greater priority for the survey of protected areas was also felt. The group recommended incorporation of modern tools like DNA fingerprinting and cladistic analysis in taxonomic studies along with use of parataxonomy. The group also felt the need for establishment of a CITES Unit.
The working groups I and II shared several concerns common to BSI and ZSI and also came up with recommendations that were equally relevant to both the organizations.
• Instead of district Floras, emphasis should be given for developing Floras of phytogeographic regions.
• Attempt should be made to carry out inventorisation in a format which shall be able to meet international standards that may be developed in future.
• The two surveys may charge for the taxonomic and other services rendered by them.
• Modern technology like DNA fingerprinting, molecular taxonomy etc. should be applied in taxonomic work.
• BSI and ZSI should undertake joint surveys so as to bring out holistic studies of the flora and fauna by way of joint publications.
• Publication of Biodiversity profiles of Protected Areas should be undertaken on priority.
• Decentralisation and alternative management systems with horizontal management and more functional autonomy.
• The Regional Offices should be theme-based with time-targeted thrust areas.
• lmage building activities to commensurate with the important work of these organisations should be undertaken.
Working Group III: Conservation of Threatened Species
The group III on conservation of threatened species laid emphasis on awareness building on threatened species and identification of areas under serious threat of habitat modification requiring immediate conservation efforts. It recommended ex-situ conservation through conventional and modern biotechnological methods. The group felt that programmes like Operation Tiger ****
Working Group IV : Microorganisms
Working Group V: Database Development
Working Group VI : Networking
global levels with relevant organisations in relevant sectors.
Working Group VII: restructuring of BSI and ZSI
The concluding session of the Seminar was held on 18.3.99. The Minister in his concluding remarks, while appreciating the hard work put in by the participants during the two-day brainstorming, assured that these recommendations would be operationlised in the shortest possible time. Highlighting the interlinkages and commonalties in the functioning of BSI and ZSI, the Minister emphasised the requirement to consider the future of these two organisations together. The Minister reiterated the need for developing effective linkages and networking with the other organisations through modem information technological tools for efficient delivery and interface with people, and for creating mass awareness. The Minister stressed the importance of public participation particularly in conservation of Protected Areas. For this purpose, he highlighted the necessity to make the people aware of the ecological goods and services provided by these conservation areas and to develop organic linkages with the ecosystems. The Minister hoped that the recommendations emanating from this seminar would provide a long-term vision and a short term action plan for BSI and ZSI in the next millennium.
A sound knowledge of taxonomy is a prerequisite for assessment and understanding of biodiversity. The conservation of biodiversity is critical for the survival of human race. Sound management strategies for sustainable use of bioresources cannot be evolved without proper understanding of biodiversity through taxonomic study of the biological components. In fact, a study undertaken by the SBSSTA at the behest of COP to the CBD had recognised there was a general decline of interest in taxonomy the world over. In an attempt to address this problem in the Indian context the MoEF, GoI, has initiated a project on capacity building in taxonomy. The Botanical Survey of India (BSI) and the Zoological Survey of India (ZSI) are the premier scientific organisations of the country and have been engaged in the survey and inventorisation of floral and faunal resources of the country for more than a century. The survey carried out by the two organisations has so far resulted in identification of about 47,000 species of plants and 81,000 species of animals. These life forms are actually and potentially important for developments in the fields of food, medicine, textiles, energy, recreation and tourism. International developments in recent years including adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992 have necessitated an assessment of work done by BSI and ZSI for reorienting these premier institutions to meet the emerging challenges of the coming century for survey, identification, monitoring, and conservation of biological diversity. It is in this context that the Ministry of Environment & Forests organised a two day National seminar during 17-18 March 1999 at New Delhi on the role of BSI and ZSI in the next millennium. The objectives of the seminar included:
About 70 leading experts from all over India participated in the seminar.
The experts were divided into seven working groups for the purpose of focused and intensive deliberations in the following theme areas.
1. Working Group I: Stocktaking and Future Strategy - BSI
2. Working Group II: Stocktaking and Future Strategy - ZSI
3. Working Group III: Conservation of Threatened Species
4. Working Group IV: Microorganisms
5. Working Group V: Database Development
6. Working Group VI : Networking
7. Working Group VII : Restructuring
These groups were chaired by eminent scientists of the country. Background papers were circulated to facilitate discussions and ensure optimum utilisation of time. The recommendations of the working groups were presented during the concluding session.
The Hon’ble Minister of Environment and Forests, Shri. Suresh P. Prabhu, inaugurated the Seminar at 10.30 a.m. on 17th March, 1999. Shri Babu Lal Marandi, Minister of State (E&F), Dr. T.N. Khoshoo, Chairman, Programme Advisory Committee (ZSI and BSI) and Shri Vinod Vaish, Special Secretary, MoEF, were present in the inaugural session. Welcoming the participants, Shri Vinod Vaish emphasised the importance of the Botanical and Zoological Surveys of India, and highlighted the need for their reorientation in order to meet the present day requirements. In his inaugural address, Shri Suresh P. Prabhu underscored the enhanced role of BSI and ZSI especially in view of the richness of biodiversity in India. He explained that this seminar was organised as a part of an overall exercise initiated in the Ministry to reorient the various organisations of the Ministry. Shri Prabhu urged the BSI and ZSI to reorient themselves in a dedicated manner so as to be able to face the emerging challenges. Shri Babu Lal Marandi highlighted the contribution of survey organisations towards conservation of the country’s biodiversity. He also laid stress on peoples participation in conserving the biological resources.
Referring to the uniqueness of biodiversity in the country, Dr. T.N. Khoshoo appreciated the foresightedness and vision of the founding fathers of the BSI and ZSI. He mentioned that these survey organisations have had a glorious past, but reiterated the need to reorient these organisations to ensure an equally promising future for them.
Organisation of the Working Groups
The participants divided themselves into seven Working Groups. The details of these Working Groups are as follows:
1. Working Group 1 : Stocktaking and Future Strategy - BSI
Chairman: Dr. M.P. Nayar
2. Working Group 11 : Stocktaking and Future Strategy - ZSI
Chairman: Dr. T.N. Ananathakrishnan
3. Working Group 111 : Conservation of Threatened Species
Chairman: Prof. M.S.Jairajpuri
4. Working Group IV: Microorganisms
Chairman: Prof. B.N. Johri
5. Working Group V: Database
Chairman: Dr. S.P.S.Khuswaha
6. Working Group VI : Networking
Chairman: Prof. C.R.Babu
7. Working Group VII : Restructuring
Chairman: Fr. C.J. Saldhana
The background papers and the recommendations of the seven Working Groups are given below.
Working Group I : Stocktaking and Future strategy - Botanical Survey of India (BSI)
Botanical Survey of India was established in 1890 with the basic objectives of carrying out floristic surveys. It was revived and reorganised in 1954. During the successive plan periods its functions have been gradually expanded. The objectives and perspectives of BSI were thoroughly reviewed in 1987-88 as follows:
1 . To survey the entire plant resources of the country.
2. To undertake and complete taxonomical studies on the flora of the country.
3. To list all endangered species, to undertake measures for their effective conservation and to collect and maintain germ-plasm and gene-banks of endangered, threatened and vulnerable species.
4. To bring out volumes of National flora and floras of states/Union territories.
5. To identify, collect and preserve specimen of plants which are economically and otherwise beneficial to human beings.
6. To prepare National Data base on herbarium collections (including types), live collections, plant genetic resources, plant distribution and nomenclature.
1 . To undertake studies on selected, critical and fragile ecosystems.
2. To undertake assessment of floras related to environmental studies as may be specifically called for.
3. To undertake ethnobotanical studies and evaluate plants of economic utility in areas specified by the Ministry.
4. To carry out geo-botanical studies in areas specified by the Ministry
A. Survey and Exploration (Primary Priority Areas)
1 . North East India
Arunachal Pradesh About 75% survey & explorations completed, the flora has been documented in three volumes; one volume already published.
Assam About 50% explorations completed.
Manipur Survey completed.
Mizoram About 30% survey & explorations completed.
Nagaland Survey completed.
2. A&N Islands About 30% survey and exploration completed; Flora
of Andaman & Nicobar, Volume I under publication.
3. Sikkim About 50% survey and exploration completed;
Flora of Sikkim, Volume I published.
4. South-western Ghats Survey completed.
5. Cold deserts of High
altitudes of Western
Himalayas Survey completed; Flora of Deserts of NW
Himalaya under publication.
B. Secondary Priority Areas
1 . Terai regions of Uttar Pradesh About 50% survey and explorations
2. Bundelkhand, Uttar Pradesh Work not yet completed.
3. Satpura & Vindyan Ranges,
Madhya Pradesh Work not yet completed.
4. Eastern Aravaili hills, Rajasthan Survey completed; Flora of Rajasthan, Vols.
and Chambal, Madhya Pradesh I, II, & III published.
5. Bastar, Madhya Pradesh Surveys completed
6. Araku Valley, Andhra Pradesh Surveys completed
7. Terai regions of Bihar Work not yet completed.
C. Survey of 60 Districts
allotted to Universities Reports on 29 districts received of
which only 15 are found useful.
D. Collection and
Multiplication of economic
and useful plants About 90 plant species were collected
for this purpose.
E. National Data Base on
Live Collections, Etc. Work not yet completed.
1. Studies on selected, critical
and fragile ecosystems (Mangroves,
Mahanadi, Sunderbans, Goa, A&N
Islands, Godavary Delta,
Pichhavaram, Vembanad dist.,
Gujarat coast, tropical coastal
ecosystem & cold desert ecosystems Publications on the Indian mangroves, cold deserts of NW Himalaya have been brought out.
2. Environment Impact Assessments Targets achieved as and when
required by MoEF
3. Ethnobotanical Studies (Santhal
Paragnas, Little Andamans, some
Tribal districts of Andhra Pradesh,
Bastar dist.& Nagaland) Work completed except for
4. Geobotanical Studies
Khetri copper belt,
Singhbhum, Bihar Targets achieved
5. Endangered Species
Publication of Red
data books 1036 threatened plants identified in V volumes (3 published and 2 in press)
Multiplication of rare,
and endemic plant species 192 plant species
6. National Floras (One volume per year) 7 volumes published;
2 under publication
7. State Floras: Rajasthan Tamil Nadu
West Bengal, Maharashtra
Madhya Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh
Manipur,J&K, Mizoram Completed
Vol. 1 published Vol. 11 (under publication)
Vol. 1 published; Vol. 11 (under publication)
Vol. 1 & Vol. 11 published
Vol. Ill under publication
Vol. 1 published; Vol. 11 & Ill (under publication)
Vol. in Press
Vol. 1 under Publication
Vol. 1 under Publication
9. Less known useful &
economic Plants Information from about 26 districts
collected and published.
Working Group - II : Stocktaking and future strategies - Zoological Survey of India (ZSI)
4.1 Primary objectives
(a) Himalayan Ecosystems
(a) Himachal Prudish
Studies on the faunal diversity of major groups like mammals, aves, reptiles, amphibians, pisces, butterflies, earthworms, molluscs etc., have been completed in all the 12 districts of the state. Approx. 5,000 species have been identified.
(b) Uttar Pradesh
( Himalayan portion)
Studies on the faunal diversity of Kumaon and Garhwal hills have been completed for major groups, namely, Mammals, Aves, Reptilia, Amphibia. Pisces, Mollusca, Lepidoptera, Orthoptera, Odonata, Isoptera, Annelida, etc. A total of about 2,200 species have been recorded from the eight districts of U.P. Himalaya and a comprehensive account of the same has been published in 1995.
(c) Jammu & Kashmir
( Himalayan portion)
28 field surveys have been undertaken. Faunistic account on fishes has been published. Remaining groups are under study.
(2) Central Himalaya
Field surveys and the studies of the faunal diversity has been completed. A document on the same is in press.
(3) Eastern Himalaya
Field surveys have been completed and the studies on faunal diversity are in progress.
(b) Desert Ecosystem
Field surveys, identification and detailed description of the faunal diversity of Rajasthan desert have been completed. The results are under publication.
The faunistic surveys of high altitude desert ecosystem at Ladakh have been completed during 1998. The fauna collected is under identification.
Faunal surveys have been completed, identification of the major faunal groups has been completed and the document on the faunal diversity will be brought out shortly.
(C) Marine Islands Ecosystems
Faunistic surveys have been completed, major faunal diversity has been identified and a document of the same has been published.
Faunistic surveys are still going on. First volume on the faunal diversity of the group of islands has been published.
(d) Tropical Rain Forests
The surveys on the faunal diversity are still being carried out.
North Eastern states
(Except Arunachal Pradesh)
Fauna of Meghalaya
Ten volumes on the faunal diversity of Meghalaya enlisting more than 5,000 species have been published.
Fauna of Tripura
A comprehensive document on the fauna of Tripura will be published in 1999.
4.1.2 Second Priority Areas
(a) Estuarine and Brackish water Ecosystems
Chilka Lake, Orissa
Faunal diversity of the lake has been completed and a comprehensive account of the same has been published.
An exhaustive account of the faunal diversity has been published.
Rushikuliya Estuary, Orissa
A document on its faunal diversity has been published.
Hoogly-Matla: W. Bengal
A document on its faunal diversity has been published.
Mahanadi Malta : Orissa
A document on its faunal diversity has been published.
A document on its faunal diversity has been published.
First volume on the faunal diversity has been published. Remaining are under process.
(b) Fresh Water Ecosystems
Osman Sagar, A.P.
Studies are still under progress.
Studies on faunal diversity have been completed. A document is in press.
Dal and Wular, J&K
Three surveys were carried out and fish fauna of family Scizothoracinae has been completed and published. Other groups are under study.
Gobind Sagar, H.P.
Around 700 species pertaining to different faunal groups have been identified, including migratory water birds.
A comprehensive document on the faunal diversity is in press.
Working Group III : Threatened Species
It is estimated that about 20% of the recorded angiosperms are threatened. This data is based on 65-70% of the area surveyed so far. The criteria being used by BSI for identifying endangered species include endemism, range country, isolation, geographic trend, nature and extent of threat and economic potential. So far three volumes of the Red Data Books have been published by BSI, while the fourth volume is in press.
For the volumes so far published, the earlier IUCN criteria were followed. In November 1994, the IUCN has revised these criteria. In these new guidelines, quantification of data and some new categories have been added to reduce subjectivity. The Red Data Books serve a very useful purpose for providing benchmark data. However, there is a need to validate the data through field based observations and quantification.
The identification of endangered species of animals is somewhat more difficult as compared to plants, since animals are mobile. It is only the larger animals that are taken into consideration while preparing lists of endangered animals.
The important issues which need attention are:
i) Current status of publication of threatened species.
ii) Current methodologies followed for identification of threatened species.
iii) Quantification and population studies
iv) Validation for identified threatened species.
v) Conservation plans for identified threatened species.
Working Group IV : Microorganisms
India is endowed with rich microbial diversity. Microorganisms include small microscopic organisms falling into the category of bacteria, viruses, actinomycetes, etc. Bacteria are simplest and the most ancient group of living organisms. They were found in rocks of 3.5 billion years old and represent a separate kingdom (Monera) and are characterised by prokaryotic organisms. They are most abundant in environment both in terms of numbers and weight. About 2,500 different kinds of bacteria have been described so far, but estimates put the figure to 33 million. The diversity in bacteria can be assessed by their physiological, biochemical and molecular characteristics. Some bacteria cause diseases in animals (including man) and plants. Some produce a variety of industrial products. The taxonomic knowledge base of the bacteria is fragmentary and the same is essential in the field of medicine, agriculture, forestry, industry and environmental protection technologies.
The viruses are the simplest organisms that are somewhat intermediate between living and non-living. The viruses are important biological entities and the diversity in viruses is extremely high in their host organisms including animals and plants. Eight major groups are recognised in viruses based on their nature and size of genetic material. A vast majority of viruses cause diseases. The diversity of viruses in India is not known and identification of viruses is critical in diagonistic and treatment of diseases.
The fungi constitute an unique kingdom of livign organisms. These are fillamentous. Fungi together with bacteria help in degradation of organic substances and cycling of nutrients. About 1,00,000 species have been described so far. Taxonomic knowledge base and expertise for this important group is not adequate in India.
There is an urgent need to undertake the assessment of diversity in microorganisms. BSI and ZSI should accord priority to the survey and identification of microorganisms and lower groups of plants and animals and capacity building in these areas.
Working Group V : Database Development
A sound taxonomic database is a prerequisite for environmental assessment; ecological research, effective conservation, management and sustainable use of biological resources. Taxonomic research warrants a holistic database development to meet the requirements of taxonomists as well as of other users including policy makers, and conservationists. Development of taxonomic database is imperative, as it provides the basic knowledge underpinning efforts to conserve biological diversity, optimise the use of biological resources in a sustainable way, and thereby enhance the quality of life.
An indicative list of the critical focal areas for development of databases includes:
1. Nomenclature database i.e., valid scientific names.
2. Distribution database i.e. recording distribution of species and mapping distribution through use of GIS tools, etc.
3. Threatened species database including conservation status of the threatened species.
4. Economic use database on known and potential uses of species;
5. Herbarium database and devleopment of CD Rom.
6. Agro-biodiversity database documenting the wide range of cultivers and their wild relatives.
These databases serve as a basline for further research in taxonomy. Moreover, depending on the user needs, the outputs could be utlised for species conservation, sustainable utilisation and habitat management. The databases developed should primarily serve users like policy makers in the decision making process or habitat managers in conservation efforts, and serve researchers and scientists as authentic and valid baseline information to further develop their specific areas of specialisation. In context to biodiversity it may be necessary to have the database in a form and manner which makes it accessible from any of the network centres. The quality, validity and interpretation, if any, of the data provided would be important to data user. It is also important that the data available is accessible in a standard format.
To meet the above requirements, there is a need to standardise the format for data collection, management (i.e. adopt common questionnaires, data coding and hardware and software etc.)
Thus, some of the important issues in developing taxonomic database are :
Working Group VI : Networking
Taxonomy is the oldest of biological sciences and is based on many centuries of observations, research, discovery and philosophical evaluations. The subject is passing through a phase of crisis so much so that virtually an extinction spasm is feared. Some of the reasons for decline in the interest in the field of taxonomy is the lack of trained taxonomists, teachers, opportunities and general awareness of the importance of taxonomy. There has been hardly any coordination among the research institutions and individuals working in this field.
The Botanical Survey of India (BSI) and Zoological survey of India (ZSI) through their network of regional offices are important centres for taxonomic research in the country. Under the University system many departments are also engaged in taxonomic research.
The existing mechanism of coordination among the institutions and individuals is inadequate. It is only through conferences, seminars, workshops that some of the taxonomists meet, discuss and share their work with each other. There is no difinite networking mechanism in the country. Often central government Ministries grant projects to taxonomists but here again no coordination exists in assessing the project during its implementation. Coordination is also poor while taking up taxonomic studies or identifying areas for survey work – resulting in duplication of the work. Collaboration betweeen individuals and institutions working on taxonomy is almost non-existent. The BSI and ZSI are, however, maintaining some collaboration with other individuals and institutions engaged in taxonomic work through their flora and fauna projects.
Networking is necessary to make best use of the revolution in information technology. Failure to network can lead to an ever widening knowledge gap. Information technology is rapidly changing the way in which people share and disseminate the accumulated knowledge in the area of their specialisation. Networking can help botanists and taxonomists in several ways:
Recommendations of Working Group I : Stocktaking and future strategy – BSI
Image Building Activites
Recommendations of Working Group II: Stocktaking and Future Strategy - ZSI
Recommendations of Working Group III: Threatened species
The working group recognised that
1. The threatened status of plants and animals is important in view of plant animal interactions.
2. Interlinking of Forest Departments, University Departments and Institutes dealing with plant and animal research, particularly in the highly endangered and economically potential species, is essential.
3. Involvement of local people and utilization of their knowledge for conservation is a must.
Based on the above premise the working group came up with the following recommendations.
1. Creating- awareness using public media on biologically important plant and animal species, identified as either threatened or endangered. '
2. Identification and conservation of black spots in which animals and plants species encounter extinction due to habitat destruction and to declare ecologically potential areas as protected areas. e.g.: Nepenthus Sanctuary, Cirtrus Sanctuary.
3. Ex situ conservation of plants through conventional methods and biotechnological methods using conventional modern biotechnological tools in botanical gardens and laboratories.
4. Increasing programmes like operation tiger to other endangered animal species.
5. Undertaking advanced research work in emerging areas to restore genotype of animal species by involving techniques like:
• Sperm cryopreservation and induction of androgenesis
• Preservation of sperm in powdered form and micro injection of sperm nucleus into egg.
• Cell fusion and cloning technique (such as Dolly) and powdered form of sperm technique
Centres of Excellence
Separate Centres of Excellence with adequate manpower and infrastructure
facilities to be created in Botanical Survey of India and Zoological Survey of India to undertake identification, validation and conservation of endangered species.
Recommendations of Group IV : Microorganisms
i ) Separate divisions of microbiology ought to be created in both BSI & ZSI with suitable manpower, comprising of both scientific and technical skills.
ii) It would be necessary to have experts on bacteria, lower fungi, algae, zoo plankton and protozoan.
maintenance and preservation of micro organisms.
iv) Identification of microorganisms today is not complete without molecular tools. It would therefore also be necessary to build minimum of facilities to undertake this work.
v) Micro organisms present in extreme environment are likely to be much more useful from the viewpoint of bioprospecting and both BSI & ZSI have regional centres located in different ecological zones; they could be used for undertaking survey work of such specialised groups. For this purpose, centres at Shillong, Port Blair, Sikkim, Jodhpur and Dehradun of BSI should be strengthened. The ZSI centre at Calicut and Hyderabad should be strengthened to build up requisite manpower for microbiological studies.
vi) Considering the extensive forays made by BSI in forests of India, it would be prudent to undertake detailed survey of both the edible and poisonous microfungi. Since many new species seem to be harboured by plants as leaf spots and others, it would be necessary to undertake detailed survey of such microfungi, maintain them under laboratory conditions and realise them for bio-prospecting. In this endeavour, it would also be necessary to characterise AM fungi that are necessarily associated with nearly 90% of the plants that exist in nature.
vii) In order to strengthen study of micro organisms in both BSI & ZSI, it would be necessary to build extensive programme of training and to develop suitable linkages with other institutions in India and abroad so that trained personnel become available in a short span of time. To further broaden the liaison, it would be necessary not only to build up linkages between (not only between BSI & ZSI but also between these two organisations and the university system.)
viii) Considering the difficulty involved in microbial identification and specialists required for each group it would be necessary for both the organisations to consider developing multidisciplinary functions with other microbiological groups located in institutes and universities so that valuable samples often collected from very remote and important areas do not remain unexplored.
Recommendations of Working Group V: Development of database
A. Development of Databases
It was felt that the databases already existing with BSI/ZSI have to be more comprehensive with respect to nomenclature, species distribution, species status, economic/ecological value, herbarium/National Zoological Collections (including types) data base and biodiversity, live collections in botanic gardens as well as collections of germplasm and plant genetic resources, so that it can meet the requirement of various individuals.
• Databases should be created using spatial as well as non spatial formats. To facilitate this use of Remote Sensing, GIS and GPS is essential and strongly recommended.
• The Herbarium /National Zoological Collections should be digitised on priority basis.
• Both BSI/ZSI should follow standard formats and if need be consultants could be appointed to start with.
• Databases should be created using standard text and picture format like HTML or any internet GIS compatible formats.
• Databases already available with BSI and ZSI should be restructured to make them compatible.
B. Standardisiation and Formatting
C. Hardware and Software
Both BSI and ZSI at present are not adequately equipped for creation of above spatial and non-spatial database, hence they need to equip themselves with Pentium-111 processor/Intergraph with minimum 20 GBHD capacity and Window NT or ORACLE Operating Systems and GIS software, like ILWIS Archinfo. (The ILWIS is available through IIR, Dehradun). Use of Global Positioning Systems is recommended in survey and exploration. Use of scanners and printers/plotters is recommended to digitise and print pictorial data.
D. Development of Expert Systems
E. Creation of Websites
Recommendations of Working Group VI: Networking
The goal of 21st century is the sustainable development, and the long-term management of ecosystem health. Understanding of ecosystem functioning requires multi disciplinary/ multi institutional integrated approach. Taxonomy has central rule in this approach, as it is the only science which will explain what kinds of organism is there and natural properties and how they respond to the changing environment. Consequently that the Botanical Survey of India and Zoological Survey of India which are the premier institution for taxonomic research should evolve extensive linkages and cross linkages to contribute to the sustainable development. To achieve this mission, the expert group after lengthy discussions have drawn up the following recommendations:
1. Areas of linkages or networking:
The Botanical Survey of India and Zoological Survey of India shall develop linkages at the local, state, national, regional and global levels in the following areas:
ii. Exchange of collection
iii. Training of manpower
iv. Extending goods and services
v. Ecosystem dynamics
vi. Joint research programme
vii. Environment Impact Assessment
viii. Genetic conservation of wild as well as domestic biota
x. Database informatics
xi. Education and training
xiii. Quarantine & trade.
2. Sectors of Networkings:
The Botanical Survey of India and Zoological Survey of India shall establish linkages with the following sectors:
vi. Public health and hygiene
vii. Rural development
viii. Waste land development
x. Environmental awareness and education
xii. Agro forestry
xiii. Research & Development
3. Promotion of Environmental Education and Awareness:
Botanical Survey of India & Zoological Survey of India shall interact with the local communities at Panchayat, Block Development Officers, District Administration and State level administration for promoting environmental education and awareness through establishment of eco/nature clubs, organising field based camps and audio-visuals and holding exhibitions.
4. Pre-service and In-service training.
To identify the resource personnel, BSI & ZSI should enter into exchange programme relating to manpower development in the areas where expertise is lacking. For this MoU between national and international institutions has to be signed.
5. Joint Research Programmes:
The Botanical Survey of India & Zoological Survey of India shall undertake joint research programmes not only by interacting among themselves, but also interacting with the universities, NG0s, National and International institutions as well as managers of protected areas.
6. Institutional Mechanism:
To implement the recommendation 1 to 5 the following institutional mechanism shall be addressed:
a) There shall be the network services unit in each of the two surveys to develop and implement the recommendations.
b) The collaborative programmes shall form the major components/ projects of annual programmes of both the surveys.
c) For effective flow of information among the collaborative institutions, there shall be additional infrastructure should be created in both the surveys besides strengthening ENVIS centre service to achieve the above recommendations.
To encourage the scientists to enter into' collaborative programmes. Consultancy shall be permitted on the same pattern of CSIR/ ICAR.
f) Regional autonomy:
The Directors of both the surveys shall be empowered to institute the fellowship to the deserving scientists/scholars independently and shall be earmarked for this purpose, suitable mechanism has to be developed.
g) The regional head of both the surveys shall be empowered and be responsible for evolving the regional linkages of their own independently.
h) There shall be clearing house mechanism to avoid duplication work among the sister organisations. This involves meeting of the concerned officials periodically.
There should be a mechanism to oversee the implementation of recommendations annually.
Recommendations of Working Group VII - Networking
It was put on record by Group VII on Restructuring that the surveys have done excellent work since their inception. However, considering the problems faced by both the surveys and challenges of the next millennium, the following recommendations are made:
The concluding session of the Seminar was held on 18.3.99. Shri Suresh P. Prabhu, Minister of Environment and Forests, Dr. T.N. Khoshoo and Shri. Vinod Vaish, Special Secretary, MoEF, participated. The Minister m his concluding remarks, while appreciating the hard work put in by the participants during the two-day brainstorming, assured that these recommendations would be operationlised in shortest possible time. Highlighting the inter-linkages and commonalties in the functioning of BSI and BSI, the Minister emphasised the requirement to consider the future of these two organisations together. The Minister reiterated the need for developing effective linkages and networking with the other organisations through modem information technological tools for efficient delivery and interface with people, and for creating mass awareness. The Minister stressed the importance of public participation particularly in conservation of Protected Areas. For this purpose, he highlighted the necessity to make the people aware of the ecological goods and services provided by these conservation areas and to develop organic linkages with the ecosystems. The Minister hoped that the recommendations emanating from this seminar would provide a long-term vision and a short term action plan for BSI and ZSI in the next millennium.
Ministry of Environment and Forests
1. Shri. Vinod Vaish, Special Secretary
2. Mrs. Malti Sinha, Additional Secretary
3. Shri R.H. Khwaja, Joint Secretary
4. Shri Satyanarayan, DLF(WL)
5. Dr. (Mrs.) Nalini Bhatt, Additional Director
6. Dr. (Mrs.) Ranjini Wamer, Joint Director
7. Dr. G. V. Sarat Babu, Joint Director
8. Dr. R.K. Rai, Joint Director
9. Dr. L.Raghupati, Joint Director
10. Dr. E.V.Muley, Joint Director
11. Shri A.K. Mehta, Deputy Secretary
12. Dr. Sujata Arora, Deputy Director
List of Participants
1. Dr. M.P. Nayar TBGRI,Palod, Thiruvananthapuram.
2. Dr. V.S. Vijayan SACON, Coimbatore
3. Dr. S.Z.Siddiqui Zoological Survey of India,
Asstt. Zool. & O/c Hyderabad
4. Dr. T.K. Chatterjee, Zoological Survey of India, Digha.
Scientist ‘SE’ & O/C
5. Dr. T.J. Pandian Univ.of Madurai,Kamraj,Madurai.
6. Dr. C.A.N. Rao, Zoological Survey of India,
Scientist ‘SE’ & O/C. Behrampur
7. Dr. L.K. Banerjee Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta
8. Dr.P.S.N. Rao Botanical Survey of India, Port Blair
9. Dr. H.S. Mehta Zoological Survey of India, Solan
Scientist ‘SE’ & O/C
10. Dr. M. Sanjappa Botanical Survey of India, Howrah
11. Dr. A.S. Chauhan Botanical Survey of India,Gangtok
12. Dr. H.S. Debnath Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta
13. Dr. P.M. Padheya Botanical Survey of India, Jodhpur
14. Dr.H.J. Choudhury Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta
15. Dr.P.Daniel Botanical Survey of India,
Scientist ‘SD’ Coimbatore
16. Dr.Umesh Srivastava NBPGR, New Delhi.
17. Dr.K. Venkataraman Zoological Survey of India, Chennai
Scientist ‘SE’ & O/C.
18. Prof.M.S. Jairajpuri Maulana Azad National Afforestation
Vice Chancellor & Eco-Development Board, Urdu University.
19. Prof. K. Hanumantha Rao Deptt. of Zoology,Andhra University
20. Dr. A.Laxminarayana CMFRI, Cochin.
21. Prof. B.N. Johri GB Pant University of Agriculture,
Professor of Microbilogy. Pant Nagar.
22. Prof. C.J. Saldhana Centre for Taxonomic Studies,
23. Dr. S.P.S. Kushwaha Indian Instt. of Remote Sensing,
Scientist ‘SF’ Dehradun.
24. Prof. M.M.Bhandari New Pali Road, Jodhpur
25. Prof. T.N. Ananthakrishnan Loyala College, Chennai.
26. Shri K.N. Reddy Zoological Survey of India,West
27. Dr. Q.H. Baqri Zoological Survey of India, Jodhpur
Scientist ‘SF’ & O/C
28. Shri C.Radhakrishnan Zoological Survey of India,
Scientist ‘SE’ & O/C Kozhikode.
29. Dr. M.S. Pradhan Zoological Survey of India, Pune.
Scientist ‘SB’ & O/C
30. Dr. Y.N.P. Sinha Zoological Survey of India, Patna
Scientist ‘SG’ & O/C
31. Dr. P.T. Cherian Zoological Survey of India, Chennai
Scientist ‘SG’ & O/C
32. Dr. Kailash Chandra Zoological Survey of India, Jabalpur
Scientist ‘SE’ & O/C
33. Dr. B.D. Sharma Faridabad.
34. Dr. R.M. Borges Centre for Ecological Sciences,
35. Dr. J.R. Sharma Botanical Survey of India, Dehradun
36. Dr. M.S. Mondal Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta
37. Sh. Brahm Dutta Press
38. Dr. Vijendra Singh Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta
39. Dr. T.M. Hennywta Botanical Survey of India, Shillong.
40. Dr. R.D. Dixit Botanical Survey of India,
Scientist ‘SF’ Allahabad
41. Dr. D.K. Singh Botanical Survey of India, Dehradun
42. Dr. S.T. Shende Janakpuri
43. Dr. S.J.S. Hattar Zoological Survey of India, Shillong
44. Dr. H.R. Khan Division of Entomology, Dehradun.
45. Prof. S.C. Srivastava Deptt. of Botany, Lucknow
46. Dr. N.P. Singh Botanical Survey of India, Pune.
47. Shri. A.R.K. Sastry WWF, New Delhi
48. Dr. M. Ahmedullah WWF, New Delhi
49. Dr. J.R.B. Alfred Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta
50. Dr. Arun Kumar Zoological Survey of India,
51. Sh. O.P. Sharma ICAR, New Delhi
52. Dr. J.K. Jonathan Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta
53. Dr. G.K. Srivastava Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta
54. Dr. S.K. Mitra Zoological Survey of India,Calcutta
55. Dr. RA. Khan Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta
56. Dr. K.K. Tiwari, Bhopal
Retd. Director, ZSI
57. Prof. R. Ramamurthy Deptt. of Zoology, Tirupati.
58. Ms. Asha Ramchandran Press
59. Sh. K.S. Kaira Press
60. Sh. M. Asokan Press
61. Sh. Vishnu God Press
62. Mukesh Press
63. Dr. C.R. Babu Deptt. of Botany, Delhi Univ.