deadhor5

At least he sells decent seeds from reputable breeders (like yourself)((Edit: I havt purchased from him since before the date you listed so i can not speak to his quality today.)). I'm well aware that he cant provide information on the background of the seeds he sells, but so far everything ive grown from him seems on par, they're still young, but the bridgesii are definately looking bridgey and the pedros are lookin pedroey. The live calea he was selling a while ago was bs though, but thats a common issue. Having a place like wss, where you can buy anywhere between 10s and 100s of seeds from various species all in one place is a pretty helpful thing for newbies who havnt found the more niche areas of this hobby where people like you are well known and easily accessible. However, once one knows where to look going straight to the source is always the best option. I don't plan on purchasing cacti from wss again, however that doesn't mean he doesnt serve a purpose. Especially with the level of noob bashing that goes on on these forums, someone just getting into cacti who wants to start some seeds might have trouble finding, contacting, and not immediately being appaled by the negative backlash they receive from more experienced members like yourself who have access to well sourced and viable seed. For them, an option like WSS is great for getting their feet wet and learning how to care for seedlings before they delve in head first and start searching for information and pictures of mother plants etc. Plus if youre just starting your first batch of seeds chances are most, if not all, of your seedlings will perish. theres no point in being able to source the lineage of your seed if you killed them all before they left the humidity dome.

unfortunately i have to agree with you. WSS definately lacks in the proper id and pictures department, however they do have decent prices and great customer service (and occasionally rare specimens) The main thing theyve brought to the discussion is large supplies of seeds, I know myself and many others bout their first few hundred trich seeds from WSS, only time will tell if that was a worthy endeavor though.

THANK YOU GUNTER! the reason i see it as a story of a cactus that did poorly after being fed high N is because after some time the skinny ribs and unhealthy bits plumped back up and are now doing excellent, still with minimal N. Thank you for your knowledgable posts, I will give a more thorough response when i get home.

Just because it is its native environment doesnt mean its the optimal setup nutrient-wise, however from a defense perspective I should do some research on the environment trichs grow in. Finding out what bugs and fungi form relationships with these cacti in their native environment could shed some excellent insight into what these cacti have evolved to expect in terms of "outside" help. edit: particularly of interest to me is the difference in soil composition and native insects between bridgesii and pachanoi/peruvianus

I did. I don't use pesticides or fungicides on my cacti, ^the time i mention above is the only time ive attempted to use any form of pest control on my plants, and after the results i dont think I ever will again. I understand basic cactus nutrition, the question I'm asking above requires scientific studies involving large numbers of plants at various levels of nutrition with all other variables controlled. As I am currently not capable of a study of this scale, I'm looking for the next best thing, personal experiences and observations from some of the people with the most knowledge of these cacti. Ive heard of people using full strength rose fertilizer on their trichs who claim its very succesful, my similar experiments did not fare as well, I'm wondering what variables can assist in defending the cacti, so that it can devote more energy (and nitrogen) to growth, rather than excess defense mechanisms.

Greetings. So its generally accepted that cacti like low amounts of nitrogen, however it is speculated that trichs may be able to handle more than most. My understanding is that while excess nitrogen will cause rapid growth and pupping in tirhc's, it leaves them vulnerable to diseases and epsts as theyve devoted most of their energy towards growth, rather than defense. I've experimented a little bit with high bnitrogen fertilizers on trich's and had fairly poor results. I used a high nitrogen fertilizer (somewhat excessively) on a potted pachanoi, it grew a LOT, and threw out 2-3 pups in one season. However, after coming out of dormancy I did not continue this fertilizing regimen and the cactus quickly deflated all of its ribs (think a more cereus look than trichocereus). I did a simmilar test on an old, rootbound, potted peruvianus. It grew quite rapidly and pupped prolifically (6-7 pups, but at the time it had no growing tips) however upon ceasing the regimen it quickly became heavily infested with scale bugs. I tried to eradicate them by scraping and applying an insecticidal soap once a week, but after a few weeks suddenly (overnight) the whole cactus developed oozing black spots, which have now faded to corking, i'm amazed it didn't die (yet). My experiments seem to validate the lowered defense hypothesis. However, it leaves a few questions to be answered. If I had not ceased fertilization would these results still be as prevalent and severe? And of particular interest to me, by providing some outside source of protection (beneficial insects like ants to ward off scale bugs potentially) could these negative effects be mitigated to a degree in which high nitrogen fertilization would be worthwhile? Currently i have a small cactus garden planted at the base of an albizia tree. Albizia is in the pea family, and has nitrogen fixing nodules in its roots that allow atmospheric nitrogen to be converted for use by plants. Albizia trees are known to drastically raise the nutrient content of the soil they are in. Furthermore, they have extra-floral nectaries, which promote plant-insect relationships, specifically with ants. Im wondering if this combination (both a constant source of nitrogen as well as pest-fighting ants) could be a successful way to grow cacti faster, without having to worry as much about leaving them defenseless. What are all of your personal experiences with various nutrient ratios in Trichs? anyone play around with introducing beneficial bugs to the ecosystem? how about mycorhizal fungi? Also If any of you know of any scholarly articles that cover experiments with nutrient ratios in cacti a link, or article title would be greatly appreciated! Tl:Dr: Tell me about your experiences with different nute levels in cacti, specifically high nitrogen.

Thank you three for actually taking time to address the original topic, however I feel your posts on desired traits in cultivars is better suited in my other thread found here http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=38494 The purpose of this post is to identify cultivars already in existence in order to begin finding a base for genetics that might be useful in creating the new cultivars that my other post refers to. Thank you for the input though! Woof woof woof, I agree a trich that does better in tropical climates would be amazing, especially for me since I spend 7 months a year in Hawaii. Part of what inspired me to create the other post (linked above) was my desire for a more water-tolerant, less rot-prone bridgesii. Tangich, I really like your ideas, currently my "dream trich" is a cross somewhere between bridgesii, terscheckii (for thickness, size, lifespan, and eventual growth rate) and pachanoi (water/ nute tolerance). I'm still on the fence as to whether id prefer spination closer to that of a bridgesii, or a scop, however either way I think some beautiful plans could arise in the process! and Halcyon.... yes. ;D although that would make propagation very difficult, unless you mean spineless with areoles, like a scop. My main problem with my current TBM's is how rarely they produce areoles, I have the tall variety and for the most part it seems to spit out a few areoles at the base of each pup followed by up to 3 feet of growth with no/very few areoles. Beautiful plants, and im sure some freaky lady somewhere would dig it, but not very ideal for cloning. ;[ My apologies EG, thank you for getting this thread back on topic. I don't want to dwell on the topic any further, however I would like to point out that this all started with zelly verbally insulting me, I responded articulately doing my best to keep my temper in control, and then he continued to ignore the topic and insult me, my reaction to that was less than controlled and i'm sorry for losing my temper, I'll ignore the trolls from now on.

Kindly fuck off and stop derailing my thread, thank you very much. I'll post pictures here eventually, in their own topic where it's actually relevant. You have no place trying to belittle me and make me "prove" myself to you, nor do I care what an egotistic jackass like yourself thinks of my interest in plants. If you have a problem with me either message me or take it up with a moderator, by attacking me in this thread you've done nothing but drag this off topic and make it incredibly apparent what a raging prick you are, and based on the likes my post has received as well as messages sent to me by multiple members, it appears that the community agrees with me. If you have nothing to contribute to the topic at hand please take your unnecessary anger and hatred elsewhere. I hope you enjoy it up there on your high horse, must make you feel real important, going around bashing new members like an elementary school bully. Grow up.

No I have not, thank you! that looks to be exactly what im looking for I agree, entirely! There's nothing better than standing amongst your columns embracing their beauty and watching them flourish! These cacti ARE very special to me (although I do grow many other cacti and plants as well, there are many other plants that hold an equally special place in my heart) Ive spent many years on the shroomery, and while there is a wealth of information there, it is so overun by "Is this a pedro?!?!?!?!" threads featuring pictures of myrtilo cacti and cereus. I enjoy this forum much more because theres a more serious scientific approach here, as well as a more close knit community with access to similar clones and varieties. Also almost all of the people I respect on the shroomery for posting excellent content post on here as well. I dont understand why you're so focused on belittling me and marking off my posts as the ramblings of a kid looking to get high, I removed any hint of information towards things were not allowed to discuss, but even to begin with that was just a minor part of my overall post, just another factor to take into consideration. I have over 30 cacti in my collection, around 20 of them are trichs, the rest range from common mammilaria and gymno's to various monstrosities and crests ive found at stores, to any other species/genus that happened to catch my eye with a price tag that fit my wallet. Few of those cacti have communities surrounding them similar to this forum and the shroomerys eg to trichocereus though, and furthermore most of these cacti are slow growing and fickle, and as a result entirely lack the amount of genetic variety, crossed seeds, and named clones seen in trichs.I apologize for offending you by not discussing non trichcocereus species, however my current interests in trichocereus breeding are fairly inapplicable to most of these other species. I have some other ideas in the works regarding pereskiopsis, however the genetic bottlenecking and difficulty in flowering are currently causing roadblocks for me, but hopefully i can provide some non trich related content in the future. I would thoroughly appreciate it if you stopped making rash generalizations about who you think i am and what you think I want based on the minimal amount of information I've posted on this forum. The majority of this board is focused on trichocereus species, and I find it quite odd that you would single me out for discussing my interest in the genus simply due to my low post count. I don't post often because I have little to input other than "Awesome, beautiful cactus!" etc. and Id much rather spend my time reading through hundreds of posts then spend months trying to rack up my post count until the point that I am recognized as a "worthy" member of the community due to the number beneath my name. IMO it is much better to have 20 posts of which the majority either contain valuable information shared, or unique approaches to questions that havnt been asked 10000X already in hopes of bringing about new valuable information, rather than 1800 posts made up mostly of irrelevant comments, attacks on new posters, and derailment of threads. In reference to your comment about not giving a shit about what differentiates one from the other, I am a botany major. While I understand the headspace you are referring to, I will always have a great interest in the genetic variance amongst generations, and what makes these plants tick. My life's focus revolves around plants, not just admiring them, but studying them. While MSsmiths input is greatly appreciated what I'm looking for is multiple reports from multiple people, one man's input on a clone isn't a proper representation of that plant, as i stated earlier the amount of variance that can occur due to growing conditions is important to take into consideration, as more people report their experiences with each clone it becomes easier to differentiate the range of growth patterns that can be exhibited by the same genes. On that note, thank you for taking a moment to address my original post in between your attacks on my desires and character. I feel silly and petty trying to prove myself to someone on an internet forum, and 90% of the time I would simply ignore your comments, however I have respect for you and am currently growing a few of your crosses. I also have a deep respect and love for this forum, and wouldnt be bringing my queries and projects here if I didn't. It upsets me to see one of the more respected members of this community attacking me based on generalizations and pre-conceived notions you have about me based on the limited amount of information I have posted. I apologize for approaching something you apparently take as a laidback hobby with a more progressive scientific mindset, however that is by no means grounds to tell me to go elsewhere, or assume that I only grow these plants for one reason.

As much as im enjoying the conversation going on here about the validity of naming clones, the original post is asking for other common named clones, and what traits are alleged to be seen in these clones, so far only two people have briefly addressed this... I realize i can look at pictures, however doing so doesn't tell me what conditions this cactus was grown under, how it compares to other cacti that person has grown under the same conditions, etc. This is why im asking for verbal(textual) responses, the person explaining to me what differentiates lumberjack from other bridgesiiis speaking from their experience in how THEIR lumberjack compares to THEIR other bridgesiis. Looking at pictures doesn't give me that point of view, I cant look at a picture of one cactus and know what makes it unique without knowing how the owners other cacti have done in the same conditions.

I agree entirely, it's quite silly to name every clone that comes about. However as this has already been going on for quite a while there are the popular widely dispersed clones like lumberjack that it appears hundreds of people have, this provides a unique opportunity to study the traits of those specific clones, how they're affected by location/growing conditions, and compare them to other popular clones. While there is likely the same if not more diversity of specimens in the US, there is much less (to my knowledge) of this communal acceptance and propagation of named clones. I am by no means suggesting every seed grown plant should be named, or that we need a larger catalog of named clones. My interest in the handful of popular widespread named clones. While Joe Schmoe may take his seed grown (or even store bought/ cutting) bridgesii and name it ParraleleElephantMonster, that's irrelevant to the majority of the community as it hasnt been propagated and dispersed for years or even decades as many of the more popular named clones have been. While it is arguable that the basis for a named clone should be that it must be seed grown, all seed grown plants aren't worthy of a name. To be named it should display at least a few unique/desirable traits (hence the original post), and be widely propagated and dispersed, at least on a local level if not across countries/globally. for example the PC "backberg" pachanoi clone is worthy of its name as it a) has been distributed in large quantities across many countries. expresses unique and identifiable traits. and c)possesses qualities desirable to cultivation (i.e pest, cold, water, and nutrient resistance.) While all seed grown plants express some amount of genetic variance, many are so similar to others that they are nearly unidentifiable, and others express undesirable traits. Furthermore only a handful of the successful seedlings will ever have the opportunity to be widely distributed, so even if you did name each and every one of your 1000 seeds their names would likely never be a common occurrence on message boards like this one. Even if a few of them ended up expressing desirable traits and were propagated and distributed it would be years before the third generation of cuttings went out, and even at that point only a handful of people would have this clone, and they would ultimately be the deciders of whether or not it became widespread and well-known, or disappeared back into the pile of un-named and un-sourced genetics. While I agree that the naming of every clone is unnecessary, the fact that there are clones going around that have accepted names and can be (at least somewhat) traced back to a source(ish) gives us a unique opportunity to obtain a better understanding of these plants.

ouch. While I have minimal posts Im not a new member, Ive been lurking on this board fro over a year and have been an active member on others for close to 3. Most of my experience is with seeds and common clones that exist in my area. I know I could simply name all my own cacti, but thats counterproductive. My interest is in commonly traded clones and what traits are common in each, what sets a lumberjack apart from an Psycho0? Ive never seen the majority of the clones discussed here offered by US sellers, however I have obtained seeds of many of these varieties and crosses amongst them, but thats useless for understanding what traits are to be expected from each variety as seeds can express many traits that arent seen in the parent. My apologies for treading into the unspoken territory, it by no means is my only interest in growing these cacti, however it is important in my mind and fascinates me for many reasons beyond the obvious. Im a botany major, plants, and peoples use of them fascinate me. Im simply trying to gather as much information from the community as i can, glad to know im not welcome here.

Unfortunately I am based in the U.S, it appears we lack the variety of accepted cultivars of pachs peruvs and bridgesiis, at least when compared to the aussies i see around here. Im wondering what characteristics of each of these cultivars seperates them from the other. Im mainly interested in the bridgesii cultivars i.e Lumberjack- (Ive heard the main trait of lumberjack is fast and thick growth, however ive also heard this is more of a representation of the growing conditions rather than the genes.) N1- Psycho0- I have no idea but it looks amazing! Eileen- ??? Pedro cultivars also interest me a great deal PC(USA)- I have plenty of this and it tends to be my baseline for describing "pachnoid traits" Yowie- ??? very interested Scop.- Some consider it a seperate species however personally it appears to just be san pedro with shorter than average spines (correct me if im wrong!) Juuls giant- My understanding of this appears to mirror that of lumberjack for beidgesii, toted for its massive thick growth I can't name a single peruvian torch cultivar however, Im much more familiar with the torch vs cuzco comparison, but even there the lines arent clear. Any input on what differentiates these verious cultivars would be of great importance to me, and im sure ive missed many, please, enlighten me SAB!

Your input would be of great value to me MS!

I disagree, however im not aware if australia's pc pach is different then the one found here. PC pach isnt very desirable imo