Lophophora Lewinii

[Chugga]

Hi There,

What a relief to finally come across a site that covers such a wide spread of info relating to cactii and succulents. I have quite a few varieties but in particular have a soft spot for my Loph's.

I beleive I currently have 3 different varities. L williamsii, L diffusa & L lewinii.

I would like to know if anyone can help me out with some info on the lewinii. I picked it up around 3 years ago and it was from a clump app 50cm wide and deep(hundreds of individual heads). I took it from the side and the head and it would have been app 5-7mm in diametre. It is now about 25mm in diametre and I am wanting to know if clumping is going to eventually occur and at what size this may happen? Is this clumping specific to lewinii or was this just a freakish specimen?

I would love to hear if anyone has any info and I look forward to catching up with others with like minded intersest.

Thanks

Chugga

[Ace]

Welcome Chugga I too was rather impressed with the knowledge that can be found on this forum regarding cacti (mostly those in the Lophophora and Trichocereus genuses). As far as I know, there is no such thing as 'L. lewinii', it is just a synonym of L. williamsii (possibly forma alba [white flowered variety]). As your description mentions the mother 'L. lewinii' as a clumping specimen with many heads, it leads me to think it was L. williamsii var. caespitosa.

For info on the different Loph species, I'd recommend looking at this thread I knocked together a while back (contains detailed pics for comparisons): Identifying the Lophophora Genus

It should be noted that it is very difficult for those not very familiar with the Loph genus to ID correctly, but with time and research, you should be able to pick them apart. It is also a lot easier if you have flowering specimens, as the flowers are usually rather different between sub species, but cross breeds can be rather tricky to ID. Without flowers, you can still attempt to ID, as rib patterns (and colour) can be used, but this isnt as reliable and tends to be rather difficult, especially on younger specimens (though can be used to some degree on larger and older specimens).

If your specimen was from a clumping mother plant, yes, with time yours should clump too (usually as they get older). But it should be noted that changes to growing conditions may affect growth habits (such as different soils, ferts, lights, temps, etc).

P.s.Would love to see some pics of your lil lophies

Edited December 17, 2007 by Ace

[tonic]

Firstly, welcome to the forums.

Secondly, never heard of L. lewinii. What you are describing sounds like a L. williamsii var. caespitosa. 50cm is enormous is there any chance of some pics?

If anyone knows of this loph please correct me.

[Chugga]

Firstly, welcome to the forums.

Secondly, never heard of L. lewinii. What you are describing sounds like a L. williamsii var. caespitosa. 50cm is enormous is there any chance of some pics?

If anyone knows of this loph please correct me.

Hi,

I wasn't to sure on the lewinii part either. That was the name on the tag next to it. Unfortunately this is no longer at the place where I got it, so I cant get a pic (for obvious reasons they were rather weary of photo's bering taken). Seeing it absolutey blew me away so I was very keen to be able to get a 'lil one.

Chugga

[Ace]

Phosphene, L. lewinii is an older name that has now been (at least AFAIK) replaced by L. williamsii. I have a feeling it was closely linked to L. williamsii fma. alba (but not 100% sure).

Yes, 50cms is rather huge for a clump, but I have heard of them up to 2 metres diametre before (not sure where I heard that [online somewhere], will try to find a link). Note that this is for a carpet of buttons, not individual ones and they tend to be located in parts of Texas/Mexico where populations have lower mescaline %'s. The reason that they are such large carpets is due to the fact that they have not been poached/consumed due to lack (or lower levels) of mescaline. It may also be that they tend to clump more prolifically, but it's more likely that they are just less sought after than those populations with more mescaline.

It sounds like this clump that Chugga stumbled across was a wild population (due to the size). Do you mind sharing which area it was found (not after a location, just in general), if it was a wild population? I am firmly against wild poaching (which may or may not have taken place in this instance) of lophs due to the damage that is being caused by overharvest, poaching, incorrect harvest technique, pillaging of seeds, etc. As much as I'd prefer to see poached specimens well looked after in professional collections and not consumed, I'd still much prefer to be able to see them one day in their native habitat. Nothing personal Chugga (I dont even know if this was the case), just want to raise awareness. Hope I havent scared you off!

Edit: Posted before I saw Chugga's previous post. If she had a tag, it could have been from a collection?

Edited December 17, 2007 by Ace

[teonanacatl]

Yeah the lewinii comes from the old name Anhalonium lewinii which is a synonym of Lophophora williamsii.

[Chugga]

Phosphene, L. lewinii is an older name that has now been (at least AFAIK) replaced by L. williamsii. I have a feeling it was closely linked to L. williamsii fma. alba (but not 100% sure).

Yes, 50cms is rather huge for a clump, but I have heard of them up to 2 metres diametre before (not sure where I heard that [online somewhere], will try to find a link). Note that this is for a carpet of buttons, not individual ones and they tend to be located in parts of Texas/Mexico where populations have lower mescaline %'s. The reason that they are such large carpets is due to the fact that they have not been poached/consumed due to lack (or lower levels) of mescaline. It may also be that they tend to clump more prolifically, but it's more likely that they are just less sought after than those populations with more mescaline.

It sounds like this clump that Chugga stumbled across was a wild population (due to the size). Do you mind sharing which area it was found (not after a location, just in general), if it was a wild population? I am firmly against wild poaching (which may or may not have taken place in this instance) of lophs due to the damage that is being caused by overharvest, poaching, incorrect harvest technique, pillaging of seeds, etc. As much as I'd prefer to see poached specimens well looked after in professional collections and not consumed, I'd still much prefer to be able to see them one day in their native habitat. Nothing personal Chugga (I dont even know if this was the case), just want to raise awareness. Hope I havent scared you off!

Edit: Posted before I saw Chugga's previous post. If she had a tag, it could have been from a collection?

Hi Ace,

No problems raising the point, I agree. This specimen was in quite an impressive private collection (Sydney Based).

Cheers

Chugga

Edited December 17, 2007 by Chugga

[Fugushi]

Welcome.

I think Lophophora lewinii is an outdated name.

Originally L.williamsii were called Ariocarpus/Anhalonium lewinii in the late 1800s. Or even Echinocactus williamsii lewinii before that. Changing a few times before finally being called Lophophora williamsii.

From the sound of things though you have a clumping williamsii with an old name.

[Ace]

Thanks for clearing that up Chugga. Damn, that is just amazing for a cultivated specimen (50cm)!! Was it in a pot, or possibly in-ground? It would have been a huge pot if so!

Cheers Teo/Fugushi - I think I may have been wrong with associating 'lewinii' with 'fma. alba'. So many outdated names that have become synonymns and they often get mixed up.

[Chugga]

Thanks for clearing that up Chugga. Damn, that is just amazing for a cultivated specimen (50cm)!! Was it in a pot, or possibly in-ground? It would have been a huge pot if so!

Cheers Teo/Fugushi - I think I may have been wrong with associating 'lewinii' with 'fma. alba'. So many outdated names that have become synonymns and they often get mixed up.

This one was in the ground

[ENtiTY]

Wow. 50cm in ground with a private collector!

That indeed would of been a site to see. No wonder the proud owner was very protective.