Comparing Cultivars of the main three trich's

[deadhor5]

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!

Edited May 13, 2014 by deadhor5

[hostilis]

Scopulicola is a species of it's own rather than a clone. One of my favorite Pachanoi clones is kimnach. If you get a chance check that one out.

[Nailthesnail]

Why is that your favourite clone hostilis? Looks similar to super pedro I think

Edited May 13, 2014 by Nailthesnail

[Evil Genius]

Hi Guys, next time i see Postings like this, i will start giving warn points again. This is like the third time someone tries to undermine our Rules and i am not playing this game. Sorry, but the Rules are clear without exceptions, which also encludes things that we can´t speak about here!. bye Eg

[hostilis]

I like the way kimnach looks. That's why I mentioned it. It has a beautiful color and nice shape to it.

And by the way EG I wasn't talking about alkaloid content. I just noticed it in the OP though. Whoops.

Edited May 13, 2014 by hostilis

[zelly]

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

pure, unadulterated bull shit.

Not so much about your unfortunate location, but about variety of available cultivars at various locations.

me thinks you have a long row to hoe & one hell of a lot of catching up to do to get up to speed on whats out here, there, and everywhere.

Go out into your garden and make up your own name on every single plant you own.

If you have 50 trichs, now you'll have 50 newly named trichs, and you'll be doing EXACTLY what the aussies have been doing; they name their favorite plants, much in the same way people give names to their animals.

It really doesnt take a genius to read thru who you are, or what your primary interest is in trichocereus cacti.

new member, minimal amount of posts, all dealing with certain aspects we are not at liberty to talk about. more than likely still wet behind the ears.

This is like the third time someone OP tries to undermine our Rules and i am not playing this game

apologies EG, but i call a spade when i see a spade.

Lumberjack- Ive heard

N1-Ive heard

Psycho0- I have no idea

Juuls giant- My understanding

I can't name a single peruvian torch cultivar however

clueless as the day is long, you have no first hand experience with anything, all you have is a head packed full of whatever bullshit you find most appealing.

[deadhor5]

pure, unadulterated bull shit.

Not so much about your unfortunate location, but about variety of available cultivars at various locations.

me thinks you have a long row to hoe & one hell of a lot of catching up to do to get up to speed on whats out here, there, and everywhere.

Go out into your garden and make up your own name on every single plant you own.

If you have 50 trichs, now you'll have 50 newly named trichs, and you'll be doing EXACTLY what the aussies have been doing; they name their favorite plants, much in the same way people give names to their animals.

It really doesnt take a genius to read thru who you are, or what your primary interest is in trichocereus cacti.

new member, minimal amount of posts, all dealing with certain aspects we are not at liberty to talk about. more than likely still wet behind the ears.

apologies EG, but i call a spade when i see a spade.

clueless as the day is long, you have no first hand experience with anything, all you have is a head packed full of whatever bullshit you find most appealing.

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.

Edited May 13, 2014 by deadhor5

[hostilis]

Please don't think you're not welcome here just based on one person's statement. Just don't talk about alkaloid content and it's all square.

[M S Smith]

I'm with zelly, way too much "clone" naming in Australia. Honestly a clone name should only be applied to a plant known to be seed-grown (not from a clipping) and with some degree of provenance, and only applied to this plant of a particular genetic make-up in perpetuity. Seems like many simply gain a plant into their collection, throw a name on it and voila, a clone, this even though someone else a couple towns away got the same plant and threw their own name on it. Pretty soon people are collecting clones unaware they are in fact the exact same plant. I've had the "lumberjack" in my collection from two different sources before the name even arose. Seems that it was an offering making the rounds long before JRL found it at Lumberjack Building Materials, which I can assure you wasn't the original source of the plant. And as for the States lacking "the variety of accepted cultivars," well that certainly isn't the case, and the variety in the States far exceeds that elsewhere. Maybe we just call them by their presumed species name. Otherwise I could grow 10,000 seeds and name each one a different "clone," which makes the idea that there should be more "named clones" seem downright silly.

~Michael~

[deadhor5]

I'm with zelly, way too much "clone" naming in Australia. Honestly a clone name should only be applied to a plant known to be seed-grown (not from a clipping) and with some degree of provenance, and only applied to this plant of a particular genetic make-up in perpetuity. Seems like many simply gain a plant into their collection, throw a name on it and voila, a clone, this even though someone else a couple towns away got the same plant and threw their own name on it. Pretty soon people are collecting clones unaware they are in fact the exact same plant. I've had the "lumberjack" in my collection from two different sources before the name even arose. Seems that it was an offering making the rounds long before JRL found it at Lumberjack Building Materials, which I can assure you wasn't the original source of the plant. And as for the States lacking "the variety of accepted cultivars," well that certainly isn't the case, and the variety in the States far exceeds that elsewhere. Maybe we just call them by their presumed species name. Otherwise I could grow 10,000 seeds and name each one a different "clone," which makes the idea that there should be more "named clones" seem downright silly.

~Michael~

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.

[Nailthesnail]

Apologies as well, I find this clone naming thing so confusing

[M S Smith]

deadhor5, your points are very well taken and I can appreciate you defense of "named clones" in particular cases and their value to the community.

~Michael~

[Halcyon Daze]

As far as I understand, people name clones because they 'like' them, and want to keep track of them. They are not really claiming that they are any better or unique or should be more sought after etc.

Having said this, some cacti are better or more sought after, and someone may choose to name the pick of the litter etc. For example, if I had a big fat blue cacti come up among other seedlings then that's the one I'd want to name, mainly just to keep track of it as the one I liked the most.

Naming a new clone can also help people know that it's a new clone on the scene, different to the others. This is helpful for people who want diversity. eg some people may want to collect as many different types of pachanoi as possible, named clones are just a basic guide that they are genetically different to eachother. It is not meant to be any indication that they are somehow any better or more sought after.

However, along with the name goes the reputation. Which is slowly built up over time. Reputation for being a fast/fat grower or a heavy flowerer etc.

It is still subjective to peoples opinions and may be proven to be wrong, but it is still a helpful guide.

As for what are the traits...

Well the only way to know is to check out the pics for your self, or get hold of one. Photos are much better than verbal descriptions of physical traits, even then people will often mention bits of info here and there, and over time you can gather a good idea of the traits of that plant.

I think naming clones is valid just like naming orchids is valid. It doesn't mean they are better because they are named. There are many shitty orchids that are named. But a prize winning orchid will always get a name. If you wanted to tissue culture that particular clone then how else would you refer to it specifically?

Of course these names are also subject to mis-identifications, forgeries and mix-ups, but that's unavoidable, and can usually be realised in the long-run. It pays to work with trusted knowledgeable and respected experts rather than unscrupulous shysters out to make a quick buck.

If I paid for a piece of "Norma" and just got a piece of cuzco, I'd be pissed. You have to be wary of 'Mutton dressed up as lamb'.

But ultimately, if you did end up with something that was due to some noob making a bone-headed mis-identification, it wouldn't be the end of the world. You have something prolly just as good and any future offspring could be just as awesome in their own way.

You just gotta...

BELIEVE!

[Philocacti]

IMO, there's nothing wrong with being interested in cacti for their ..........

If that makes people grow them and collect them, soon their interest in cacti will grow further to more than one aspect of the the whole

[hookahhead]

Its not like it's any big secret ALL cacti have crack cocaine in them...

• Richard Prior nearly blew himself up using ether to extract it out of a christmas cactus.
• Tina Turner was found dead in a bathtub after trying to blast her way to the moon using Gymnocalycium mihanovichii pups.
• Pee Wee Herman was arrested for sneaking a Lophocereus schottii cv. BPC into a movie theater without paying for a ticket.

Do not make the same mistake as these famous people, and just say no to cact-uses

And then of course there's this: http://store.treehousegreengifts.com/prickly-cactus-eggling-crack-and-grow-garden-by-noted/

Remember kids...

Crackti, not even once!

Edited May 14, 2014 by hookahhead

[deadhor5]

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.

[hookahhead]

Lumberjack is supposed to have a dominant, downward pointing spine I believe.

Have you seen this link yet?
Named Clones Database Discussion Thread

[zelly]

what differentiates lumberjack from other bridgesiiis speaking from their experience in how THEIR lumberjack compares to THEIR other bridgesiis.

MY Ljack grows much fatter than all of the other of MY bridgesii's except one. And interestingly, that other bridge has very similar spines to MY Ljack. The other bridge is much more robust, probably my fastest growing trich & with massive basal pupping.

And you're entirely correct, pictures just dont cut the mustard......in explaining to you how gawd damn magnificent these plants are, growing side by side with each other, planted in the ground but reaching for the sky......and then when they flower......its one of those OMFG moments......trust me mate, when you're in that head space you wont give a shit about what differentiates one from the other.

I get the vibe from you that a cactus has to be special in some way or 'unique' for you to have much interest in it....which is ok i suppose, but you have to remember this is a forum of growers who grow all kinds of plants, including all kinds of cactus, regardless if they are 'unique' or if they have special characteristics.

IMO you need to take your fishing expedition over to the shroomery or similar forum, then again, maybe you'll luck out and mssmith will chime in on what makes each and every one of his bazillion trich's 'unique'.

[deadhor5]

Lumberjack is supposed to have a dominant, downward pointing spine I believe.

Have you seen this link yet?

Named Clones Database Discussion Thread

No I have not, thank you! that looks to be exactly what im looking for

MY Ljack grows much fatter than all of the other of MY bridgesii's except one. And interestingly, that other bridge has very similar spines to MY Ljack. The other bridge is much more robust, probably my fastest growing trich & with massive basal pupping.

And you're entirely correct, pictures just dont cut the mustard......in explaining to you how gawd damn magnificent these plants are, growing side by side with each other, planted in the ground but reaching for the sky......and then when they flower......its one of those OMFG moments......trust me mate, when you're in that head space you wont give a shit about what differentiates one from the other.

I get the vibe from you that a cactus has to be special in some way or 'unique' for you to have much interest in it....which is ok i suppose, but you have to remember this is a forum of growers who grow all kinds of plants, including all kinds of cactus, regardless if they are 'unique' or if they have special characteristics.

IMO you need to take your fishing expedition over to the shroomery or similar forum, then again, maybe you'll luck out and mssmith will chime in on what makes each and every one of his bazillion trich's 'unique'.

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.

[nitrogen]

Per the clone naming thing, it used to be more that a clone got a name if it was special or noteworthy in some way, or had an interesting story behind it - now it does seem it's applied to pretty much every tricho in Oz, so just because a clone has a name doesn't mean there's anything special about it..

That said though, the bridgesii clones Lumberjackus, Psycho0, Eileen, N1, KGC, SS02, and Bruce anyway are all certainly worthy of being named.. There's lots of great clones out there though..

For breeding purposes though naming is very useful - we see this with ariocarpus and roses and so forth..

[zelly]

curious that feel you have nothing to offer .....botany major & all......you should be taking notes from hookahead instead of me

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

care to share pics of them?

Or share your experiences growing them?

[deadhor5]

curious that feel you have nothing to offer .....botany major & all......you should be taking notes from hookahead instead of me

care to share pics of them?

Or share your experiences growing them?

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.

[Evil Genius]

This Thread is as close to being closed as it gets. Final warning and i mean it. Next time i have to moderate, it´s gone. And i don´t care why.

And OP, i understand it´s a bad situation when someones writes something that pisses you off, but you stop using insults now! You don´t have to like each other, but I won´t allow verbal insults. If you have a problem with a certain post, either report it or message me. But not like this.

[woof woof woof]

Cultivars; Here is what I want,... I want Trich's that flower in tropical conditions. So if any of you live somewhere between the sub-tropics and tropics and get trich's that flower,... I would love a cutting.

Another trait I would like it for them to be less rot prone. T. Bridgedsii's for example are the most rot prone. Peruvianus have withstood fair amounts of rain.

What traits would you guys like to see in the trich's??? Flower color,... variegation, growth speed,.. mutations :D ????

Edited May 16, 2014 by woof woof woof

[Berengar]

I would like a plant with cold and water tolerance, and fatness, of T. pasacana, spination of T. chilensis, but with dark coloured spines, and glaucousness and growth rate of Psycho0! Come to think of it, Stetsonia coryne and Azureocereus hertiglianus are pretty close...