Talk:Banyan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

There is also a group of traders known as Banyans, who were based in India but traded throughout the area of the Indian ocean; I'm not sure if the tree was named for them, vice versa, or there is no conenction between the two. (I know of these traders because they operated along the edge of medieval Ethiopia in Massawa & Suakin; but not much more than that.) -- llywrch 21:45, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

It's said that the Banyan tree is so named because traders gathered underneath it. So, a direct connection! Would be good to have a Wiki page on the traders so we can make the link. Mark Nesbitt 10:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ficus retusa

I suggest adding the Ficus retusa to this page, since it has also been called a Banyan. However, I don't know too much about biology and so I want to let others decide what to do. Thank you for your help! --Ghormax 21:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Florida

The section "List of Species" seems to contradict itself. It says: 'The first banyan tree in the U.S. was planted by Thomas Alva Edison in Fort Myers, Florida.' but then says: 'The Strangler Fig (Ficus citrifolia) is native to southern Florida' and 'The Florida Strangler Fig (Ficus aurea) is also native to southern Florida'

[edit] Merge suggestion

There's a separate "strangler fig" article. The banyan page is more comprehensive of different subspecies in different parts of the world; it also has more detail, and a more professional/encyclopedic tone. I'm not sure if there's anything on the Strangler Fig page that isn't also on the Banyan page; maybe the Strangler Fig article just needs to be deleted...? --Vcrs 08:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Banyan tends to be the common name for this group of figs in south Asia/Austrailia, while strangler figs tends to be more common name for the Americas and Africa, if the strangler fig article was deleted, I recommend augmenting the name of the banyan article to include strangler fig in (). I have also noticed that Banyan is used to describe the trees out of the forest context (desert, deforested area etc...), as apposed to being in a standing rainforest, where strangler fig is often used. But my experience with these specific trees is limited, so someone else might have better information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.205.103.23 (talk • contribs) .

It appears that some species has been called The Strangler Fig, but Strangler fig is used as a generic name for figs with a particular growth history and form. It is a generic term while Banyan is a specific name for Ficus benghalensis. It however appears that some people have extended the usage of Banyan to other species. I would not merge them as one is about figs with a particular growth form and the other is about a particular species. Strangler figs species that I could find on the net include Ficus pertusa F. tuerckheimii Ficus watkinsiana Ficus aurea Ficus rubignosa ... [1] Not enough reason for a merge. Shyamal 09:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest that all Banyans are strangler figs, but not all strangler figs are Banyans. Og course I'm on thin ice analysing two common names, but there are a number of Ficus which, while they strangle their hosts, do not send down aerial roots at a distance from their main "trunks" the way figs that we usually call "Banyan" do. Ficus costaricensis, which shares its Spanish common name "Higuerón" with Ficus citrifolia (and which, by the way, deserves mention in the page on Srangler Figs or even a page of its own, confines its aerial roots to "home base."