trucha

Someone also wiped out every last plant in the Big Bend population. Since those were harvested with roots it was likely a cactus collector. In South Texas, on the other hand, the primary poachers are now and always have been the licensed distributors and their employees who are harvesting to sell to the NAC. Not all of them (I think maybe 6 licensed distributors are registered this year) but one in particular actually holds this as a point of pride and is famous for publicly proclaiming "No fence is too high for me.". As long as those buying the medicine are OK with this, it has no possibility of changing. BTW I've been informed by several people now that no one in South Texas considers it to be "poaching". Everyone prefers the more polite "fence jumping". Dudleya may be in even worse shape here in California. People stealing $90K" worth of plants to ship to China or Korea face a $10K fine. One successful trip will pay for several failures and still be nicely profitable. The market for them appears to be booming. Google Dudleya poaching if you want to learn more.

As an update for June 2019: The Big Bend peyotes have finally all been collected. Someone took around half of them a few years back after Gerhard Koehres posted a series of scenery shots taken at the site but now the remaining couple of dozen have been removed too --roots and all. Which probably suggests cactus collectors rather than consumers. That tiny population is now extirpated. People owning these really should be regarded as being akin to ivory collectors.

The PDF of Snu Voogelbreinder's work Garden of Eden just went online as of last night. http://www.largelyaccurateinformationmedia.com/LAIM/snu.html

I think this is as far as I am goign to take it but hope these four posts can helps us keep our plants on parallel paths rather than puddling into one unworkable morass where they probably belong. If I HAVE to I'll add more but hopefully this is enough to get this insanity tour started properly. I was wondering what features can reliably recognize a bridgesii.

I was unclear where might be best for posting this. Moderators please move it if it would be better elsewhere. Thanks! With my apologies to all that that this is my reality today. Recently it was brought to my attention that links from my former website Largely Accurate Information Media are being used for exposing people to malware and a virus. I stopped using several websites a couple of years or so ago, that being one of them. Apparently it is now owned by someone who is using it to deliver malware. The titles that are affected: Notes on the Genus Desmodium San Pedro book (with and without Pachanoi or Pachanot) Pachanoi or Pachanot Cactus Chemsitry By Species Cactus Chemsitry By Species Light Cactus Alkaloids Some other succulents I uploaded an earlier copy of Some other succulents and also Notes on the Genus Desmodium from prior to the addition of internal links to other publications or articles of mine. That was not possible for the others so all of those have been revisited and the links either removed to else replaced with something current. This was noted on their front cover to make it easier to recognize the replacement files. All of these are now at troutsnotes.com replacing the compromised copies bearing the same names. If you have one of those earlier copies they are safe as long as you do not click on a link to the LAIM site or follow the suggestions that pop up but a much safer idea is to just delete all of those and obtain new copies. I also uploaded a copy to DropBox where a person can take a look at them prior to deciding whether to downloading them. Cactus Cultivation C2_CactusCultivation.pdf https://www.dropbox.com/s/fvp1y7sl5aq0y5b/C2_CactusCultivation.pdf?dl=0 Cactus Alkaloids C13_CactusAlkaloids.pdf https://www.dropbox.com/s/8im9x6bsdvvjavt/C13_CactusAlkaloids.pdf?dl=0 Cactus Chemistry By Species Light (illustration-free for easier use during research) CactusChemistryBySpecies_2014_Light.pdf https://www.dropbox.com/s/4tf64kfn538d8q7/CactusChemistry_2013_Light.pdf?dl=0 Cactus Chemistry By Species (Intensely illustrated.) CactusChemistryBySpecies_2014.pdf https://www.dropbox.com/s/aikxohacl8iavjb/CactusChemistry_2013.pdf?dl=0 Pachanoi or Pachanot? Pachanoi_Pachanot-bad-links-replaced-jan-2018 https://www.dropbox.com/s/p1tx3q17hg6y1vd/Pachanoi_Pachanot-bad-links-replaced-jan-2018.pdf?dl=0 San Pedro and related Trichocereus species SanPedro_2006_with_pachanoi_pachanot_addendum.pdf https://www.dropbox.com/s/kshk4mn74fpolfr/SanPedro_2006_with_pachanoi_pachanot_addendum.pdf?dl=0

Taxonomy has always been more of a political endeavor than a scientific one. It is not actually about the plants but rather is about what names people want to apply to them and how they want to rank them with regards to their perceived relationships to each other. Even when based on molecular data there is still plenty of room for individual opinions to be expressed. It is true that anyone can name a plant but getting a proposed name accepted is not so easy. The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature is available (both online and in print) should you want the details about naming plants. The Melbourne version is the most recent one.

I somehow forgot a title. Sorry about that! Some Simple Tryptamines https://www.dropbox.com/s/8rt48q7b1ejc7dx/SomeSimpleTryptamines_2ndEd_2007_with_addendum.pdf?dl=0

One other comment. At this moment none of the actively ongoing cultivation activities inside of the USA (all of which are relatively tiny operations) involve groups with legal protection for that activity and, as far as I can determine, none of them produce sacrament for or accepted by the federally recognized legal users of peyote. This appears to be in the process of possibly shifting but it is not there yet. There is a subtle element many people miss. No group presently using peyote or ayahuasca with some degree of legal protection is doing so under constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and are variously accomodated under either state law or is based on congressional legislation.

2015 and 2016 data have been added. DPS handed this responsibility to DEA after 2016. http://www.cactusconservation.org/CCI/library_index.html

Sure, there is no question about that. Dig into their documents --at their website and elsewhere online-- to study the actual details of their legal challenges (or ask them) Peyote Way lost their last court battle more than twenty years ago despite being recognized as sincere by the same judge. They are not just sincere but dedicated to their beliefs and did not abandon them. They are operating openly but it is without recognition of legal protection. They are simply being unmolested. That subject is densely complicated so it is often misunderstood to be something other than what it is. Ever since Oklahueha and two ayahuasca churches experienced limited success the DEA is picking their fights carefully to avoid more of those from occurring. In the scenario as it now exists and if PWCOG had the resources to support such a legal fight it is conceivable they might triumph in the wake of being attacked now. It would take them many years and a lot of money to do so. I don't know how much money Oklavueha spent but it took them 12 years of court appearances and legal fees. AND it is clear the powers that be are still wanting to try and find a way to somehow take them down. It is a circus very much worth watching in the wake of them declaring cannabis, ayahuasca "and other" to be their sacraments in addition to peyote. It is also important to understand Peyote Way ended up in court due to actions that involved Emerson Jackson who was then president of the Native American Church of North America and objected to them being peyote people -- on racial grounds. There are cultivation efforts occurring in Alaska and in Canada. One important element about the limited efforts ongoing towards peyote cultivation is those are all greenhouse activities and none are presently involving wildcrafting or repopulation in South Texas.

There is no peyote farming involved in sacrament production for legal users of peyote in the USA or Mexico. All peyote is presently wild harvested. Licensed distributors are actually forbidden to cultivate or to plant seeds by the same sets of laws that enable them to harvest. Similarly a landowner has permission to allow harvesting (iand to charge a fee for access) and are permitted to clear their land or otherwise destroy it but they are not permitted to plant, move or cultivate it. They also can't sell their peyote by volume or by the piece and can only lease access to pickers and charge them a fee for a given period of harvesting opportunity. TONS of misunderstandings about these topics exist. Some people (including some authors) actually believe the Peyote Gardens are a garden rather than being a wild natural feature. Vastly more peyote, peyote populations and peyote habitat have been destroyed in the course of land development and brush clearing than from all harvesting activities combined. The majority of the previously existing populations in Texas have been gone for quite some time. There is a fourth distributor now but she is too new to have added numbers to the record and 2016 was the last year of mandatory reporting to DPS. This activity is under the DEA's oversight now so it is not yet clear if this will continue to be information that is available to the public. A lot of information on this general subject of peyote harvesting can be found at www.cactusconservation.org.

I'm not sure this is the best place for this post but if not perhaps a moderator would move it for me? Thanks! Some people are already aware that I am involved with creating a digital public access version of Sasha and Ann Shulgin’s archive. I am already more than halfway through Sasha’s filing cabinets and only one lab book remains to be completed (the finished but redacted lab nooks are already online at Erowid and at Archive.org). There is still more material which is located in another building, and Sasha's library, as well as a massive amount of photographs for which Ann is assigning names and locations. For the last few months we also have been operating with inadequate resources to the point that I have been buying basic office supplies out of my own pocket and are now limited to working with a sheet fed scanner due to the flatbed scanner ceasing to communicate with my computer some months ago. Like any archiving activity we need to have the means to accomplish our goal of getting this material digitized. I simply do not possess the resources to do this by myself despite having plenty of willingness and energy to put into accomplishing this goal. If this project is of any interest to you please visit www.shulginarchive.org and consider making a small donation. If we received $10 or $20 from even a quarter of Sasha's fans the project would be doing great and would have a secure future. We do not need very much support in order to succeed but we cannot do so without adequate resources existing. Due to our present shortfall, I am now the only worker who still remains in this project. I plan to stay with this as long as I am able but the future reality of the Shulgin digital archive will depend on whether it actually has public interest. Thanks! kt http://www.shulginarchive.org

My apologies for the math error in that original posting. That has been corrected.

Important changes have occurred which will I believe will enable me to succeed at digitizing the archive. An announcement was posted at both: http://www.shulginresearch.org/home/https://www.shulginarchive.org

The question as to why a plant merits recognition as a clone is certainly one that might want to be asked. Too many clones seem to get named on the simple basis that someone owned them (despite lacking any real difference from what is available in horticulture). Too many new names simply confound clarity and contribute nothing of value but it is also worth noting that names only stick when other people accept and use them. However, keeping track of those hybrids is valuable for all of us. Labels are a real problem. Metal solved my sun related problems but not the human generated errors. Largely those have been due to lazy visitors picking them up to read but then carelessly not putting them back in the same place. The only thing I've found that works for me is burying the tags under some gravel so that I can find them when I need them. MindBenderDick4000 looks a lot like Knize's "new San Pedro".

I've had excellent results removing most or all of the soil (washing them clean whenever going international), wrapping the roots with a piece of moist paper towel, carefully wrapping that inside of a plastic bag, enclosing the entire lot in another loosely fitting paper bag, then securing all of that with tape and cushioning so it cannot move around inside of the box. Over the years multiple species of temperate, semitropical and tropical species have been sent this way via USPS with only the rare failure. However, you cannot control the actions of careless people who fail to pay attention to the needs for continued humidity, moisture and warmth. They are very likely to fail no matter how you ship the plants.

An interview apparently went online yesterday. https://psychedelicsalon.com/salon2-033-the-psychedelic-archives-of-keeper-trout/

One more article is heading to print. Two more are going to press actually but this one recently had its PDF show up online . http://brit.org/webfm_send/1769

I agree with Darklight's comment "The exxy bit is getting the sequence data analysed by someone who knows what they're doing." This is ongoing for Lophophora right now so I can greatly appreciate what that means. Interpreting the preliminary analysis was something like $8K and the necessary follow up including some additional sequencing went well over $20K. No human actually does this part as it is far to complex. Software does the number crunching and then a human interprets those results. There is a surprising degree of capriciousness within this picture so a disturbing part of what has been published is really no more solid than a house of cards. The bar really needs to be raised a notch imho. The cheap tests and results (like one would use to learn about their ancestry or potential medical conditions) involve identifications of known markers and are not actually sequencing anything. However, if sets of markers had been established for our plants of interest that sort of test could certainly be developed for this narrow area.

I'm slowly completing my task list for this year. The 2016 look at the post-harvest regrowth is finally online. http://www.cactusconservation.org/CCI/regrowth.html

This might not be a nice or comfortable question to ponder but it might possibly be helpful. *Why* is your friend quitting? If it is for any reason other than a heartfelt burning desire to get free from that relationship, it will be a long and hard road that is more likely to fail than to succeed. Many people addicted to drugs of one sort or another (including alcohol) want to quit because they think they should or think that they have to or or they need to or they decide it is necessary because they are in some sort of trouble with the law, work, relationships or family. The majority of those people will experience a miserable path of repeated failures alternating with sober living while keenly aware of an gaping, empty hole existing in their being. Anything less than seriously wanting to be free is more likely to fail than not. The more a person actually WANTS to get free, the greater the chance of success. The present disempowering model views addiction as a disease which is not actually correct and does not help "cure" people. If the addication can instead be regarded as a symtom of a behavioral problem that involved developing a dysfunctional relationship with a molecule, the user has a chance of getting a handle on it and some personal empowerment capable of enabling success. I'd suggest the best path for most people is to drop all adjunct drugs being enlisted to help stop another drug. Withdrawals suck but frankly a bad case of the flu is a far worse experience than opiate withdrawals. By the time opiates are cleared enough for adding naloxone they are also cleared enough for a drug free recovery. If someone really NEEDS naloxone or antibuse, that is fine. More power to them. But I'd say also that if those sorts of approaches are necessary that person does not really WANT to quit, instead they are quitting because they decided that they NEED to quit or are being forced to quit by someone or something else. I got strung out when I was a teenager. I got off dope by WANTING sincerely to be free from being used by my beloved molecule (much like realizing you are in a toxic relationship with a loved one who will bring you nothing but harm). I've never looked back and have since discovered that I have no problem with being attracted to narcotics now even if I am prescribed opiates for pain. Naloxone, methadone and 12-step models do actually work for some people but they are only a few percentage of the people using narcotics. "WHATEVER WORKS" is a good mantra but recognizing what is not working on an individual basis is a key part of learning what does work. One other side of this worth pondering is that some people actually need opiates due to their body making inadequate endorphins and such. Those people are literally self-medicating to address a biochemical deficiency. For that subset of narcotic users, learning how to either better regulate their use responsibly or learn to gain better control over their biochemistry through tools such as biofeedback is a far more achievable option than just getting off the drugs. Modern drug education in the USA rejects responsible use as even being possible yet in Europe this has been proven to be more effective at giving some people their lives back than AA/12-steps. Finding the right path for the individual rather than a one size fits all solution is a valuable approach to finding success. All of those models, including AA/12-steps, can work for some individuals and will not work for others. Thomas Szasz pointed out the single most valuable question for actually finding solutions to people's drug problems needs to be "Why is THIS particular individual self medicating with THAT particular drug and what of value is being given to them in this relationship." If that question is not honestly asked and answered the 'solution' will be focused on the drug and not actually touch the underlying causes for the use developing into a problem. The answers for resolving drug abuse lie in knowing much more about the individual and why they chose that drug than they are about the actual drug itself. Best of successes to your friend finding internal peace. Just my two cents' worth.

In the wild Lophophora williamsii always grows on a sloping surface so it is never trapped in a puddle of silt. Just factor drainage into your planting and they will be fine through an amazing amount of cold and wet. Be sure the soil has abundant calcium (such as liimestone gravel) and a neutral to slightly alkaline pH. Protection from animals and birds is important. They don't eat much but disfigure them and rot organisms can gain access. Once animals get a taste they commonly return for repeat snacks.

As if I have all the time in the world.... I was wondering what features can reliably recognize a pachanoi.

The Macrogonus Onus: part 1 the macrogonus stories An investigative meta-review by Keeper Trout. ----------------------------------- This compilation is intended only to aid private research and is not intended for distribution or publication. It had grown too large so was divided into smaller sections. Part 1 is still in-progress but has finally reached the reference literature excerpt assembly stage and is ready to be edited into a final document. I welcome comments about any errors or omissions. Translations into English, whether from Latin, German, French, Italian or Danish, were intentionally created to be readable rather than literal so paraphrasing will be noticed as commonplace. Please bring any need for corrections or fine-tuning to my attention. I was unable to determine the copyright holder for some images of people and places. If any image included herein is considered objectionable let me know and I will immediately remove it or will pay fair compensation for its inclusion. This work never could have been created if not for the University of Texas at Austin's library system and Inter-library loan's help in locating many of these publications. It never could have been completed this far without the existence of some additional amazing digital resources such as CactusPro's online library, Bioheritage Diversity Project, and the Bibliothèque nationale de France who have made the vastly largest part of the old botanical literature available for anyone to access. The people behind those endeavors are true educators. Biodiversity Heritage Library http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/Default.aspx Botanicus http://www.botanicus.org/browse/titles Cactus & Succulent Digital Library http://www.cactuspro.com/bibliø The single most amazing collection of cactus literature that I am aware of. Gallica The digital library of the National library of France. http://gallica.bnf.fr/?〈=EN another great resource that was not used in this is Virtual library del Real Jardín Botánico CSIC http://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/ing/index.php This review includes what I believe to be copyrighted materials. I also believe that this use of those copyrighted materials within this review falls within "Fair Use" as defined in the "Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. " I believe that to be true, based on the reason that this article is a scholarly review of historical material which is intended entirely for noncommercial educational purposes. If the copyright laws of another country conflict with this, or even if any copyright owner simply objects to my inclusion of their images, let me know via a PM and I will promptly remove them. The larger picture involving the name macrogonus Part one is focused on assembling the literature concerning or mentioning the name Trichocereus macrogonus and presenting images of some horticultural plants known under this name. Parts two through nine present a similar but presently less extensive assemblage of reference materials for pachanoi AKA Albesiano & Kiesling's macrogonus subsp. pachanoi, "the macrogonus formerly known as peruvianus", bridgesii, cuzcoensis, other related trichs, and additional supportive material. My intention is to put the entirety of Part One online in this forum for public review and discussion. The present document is 245 pages long but nearly half of that is images. The contents: The literature around the name macrogonus -- 7 Cereus macrogonus Otto -- 8 Carl Friedrich Förster. 1846 -- 10 Jos. de Salm-Dyck. 1850. -- 11 J. Labouret. 1853. -- 13 C. F. Förster. 1886 -- 16 W. Watson 1889 -- 18 B. von Ladenberg. 1893. -- 19 De Martius et al. 1899. -- 20 FAC Weber. 1899. K. Schumann. 1899. -- 28 M. Gürke. 1907. -- 35 A. Berger. 1904. -- 36 A. Berger. 1905. -- 39 V. Riccobono. 1909. -- 41 N. L. Britton & J. N. Rose. 1920. -- 45 E. Schelle. 1926. -- 48 A. Berger. 1929. -- 50 A.V. Frič. 1931-1932. -- 52 C. Backeberg (& E. Werdermann). 1931. -- 53 E. Werdermann. 1933. -- 55 Catalogue Jahandiez. 1934. -- 56 Kakteenkunde. 1934. -- 57 H. Blossfeld. 1935. -- 58 K. Kreuzinger. 1935. -- 60 Guillaumin Cactees. 1935. -- 64 C. Backeberg & F. M. Knuth. 1936. -- 65 C. Backeberg. 1937. -- 67 Rimac river & valley map -- 68 J. Borg. 1937. -- 69 J. Borg. 1951. -- 69 C. Backeberg. 1941. -- 70 P. Fournier. 1954. -- 72 H. Johnson. c. 1958-1968. -- 75 C. Backeberg. 1959. -- 76 S. Agurell. 1969. -- 84 G.D. Rowley. 1974. -- 85 H. Krainz. 1975. -- 86 C. Backeberg. 1977. -- 90 D. N. Smith. 1982 -- 94 Smithʼs collection site -- 101 E. F. Anderson. 2001. -- 103 D. H. Hunt & ICSG. 2006. -- 105 S. Albesiano & R. Kiesling. 2012. -- 107 S. Albesiano & T. Terrazas. 2012 P. Jorgensen et al. 2015 J. Lode et al. 2015. Some Cereus weirdness -- 125-134 Cereus bolivianus -- 125 Cereus hempelianus -- 126 Cereus hexagonus -- 128 Cereus heptagonus -- 130 Cereus tetracanthus -- 131 Cereus tephracanthus var. bolivianus -- 131 Cactus catalogs -- 135 NonKnize field collections -- 136 macrogonus in horticulture -- 138 ----------------------------------- The literature around the name macrogonus The identity of Trichocereus macrogonus would seem like an easy thing to determine. Especially as it was declared to be the type for the genus Trichocereus. It has also been discussed in print by at least a handful of experts who were familiar first-hand with the original material growing under cultivation in Berlin, Germany or its progeny under cultivation elsewhere in Europe. There have even been published descriptions and photographs, albeit none very good until surprisingly recent times -- and some creating lasting problems. At present the burden of proof is on anyone to link their modern concept of a macrogonus to what Salm-Dyck described in 1850. It MIGHT be possible using modern molecular tools but interestingly it appears to be more difficult to trace any of the macrogonus in Europe back to Berlin than it appears to be to find it growing in South America. Without the existence of solid links on both ends of that, any pronouncements of synonymity will remain hollow in meaning. This is a peculiar story filled with more new questions than answers. Here is the tale documented as best as the ‘facts’ at hand will permit. Please pardon my ob-alliterative pun of a title. ------------------------------------- Cereus macrogonus Otto is given by Schumann, Riccobono, Britton & Rose and others as the type species for the genus Trichocereus but no further information about where it appeared in use or print. As far as can be determined, it lacked any earlier description than what seems to have been cowritten by Otto & Salm-Dyck. Otto = Christoph Friedrich Otto 4 December 1783 (Schneeberg, Saxony) – 7 December 1856 (Berlin) Otto is often associated with Johann Heinrich Friedrich Link 2 February, 1767 (Hildesheim) – 1 January, 1851 (Berlin) No matter where the name came from, the first player to enter the scene and leave their name persistently attached to some actual comments about our macrogonus is Jos. de Salm-Dyck. This image was gleaned from online. I do not know its origin. Prince Joseph Maria Franz Anton Hubert Ignaz Fürst zu Salm-Reiffersscheid-Dyck 1773 - 1861 The Prince sure does look like he would rather be out in his garden. It might be remembered that, as is also true for the “soft” schools of martial arts such as Wing Chun, cactus collection in Europe was once entirely the domain of the rich. Namely those people who had both the available free time and the money to devote to doing things that always require a lot of time and money but usually pay nothing. ----------------------------------- Berol. AKA Hortus regius Berolinensis Botanischer Garten Berlin = Botanischer Garten Dahlem = Botanischer Garten Berlin-Dahlem the “botanical gardens at Berlin” As seen in 1909 As seen in 1936 All buildings are said to have been destroyed or to have sustained damage during WWII. Most of their collection of living cacti and the herbarium were lost to the bombing and subsequent water damage followed by cold weather. Berlin's herbarium contained not just herbarium sheets of dried cacti; it also included many intact cactus specimens, sections and parts that were being preserved in liquid in jars. This was obviously only one of many millions of tragedies resulting from that war but it represented an enormous loss to botanical science. ----------------------------------- Carl Friedrich Förster. 1846. Handbuche der Cacteenkunde macrogonus was mentioned only in passing; on page 391. "Zu dieser Untersippe gehören auch: C. macrogonus & tortus H. berol.; d. letztere ist noch sehr selten." "Also in this branch are C. macrogonus & tortus Hort. Berol; the latter is still very rare." ----------------------------------- Jos. de Salm-Dyck. 1850. Cacteae in Horto Dyckensi Cultae, Anno 1849 p 46 Cereus macrogonus II. Berol. (59.) "aculeis albidus, saepe apice nigris" "spines whitish" (implying a soiled white), "with tips blackish" (nigris can imply a black that is a bit rusty) The epithet in Schumann indicates that this was at least partly written by Otto rather than by Salm-Dyck. Assuming that to be true and taking Förster's comments literally would suggest that Otto wrote the first paragraph and Salm-Dyck the second. They certainly do appear to say much the same thing being voiced by two observers. p. 203 p. 203 (59) C. Macrogonus II. Berol. 
" C. caulo erecto columnari subglaucescenti-læteviride 6—7 angulato, costis turgidis obtusissimis apicem versus obrepandis ad pulvillos crenato-plicatis et colore intensius viride arcuatim notatis, pulvillis confertis griseo-tomentosis, aculeis rigidis abbreviatis brunneis, in pulvillis junioribus 8—10, in senioribus 18—20, erecto-patulis, 3—4 validioribus. (Nob.) 
 Caulis hucusque 8—10 pollicaris, diametro fere bipollicari. Costæ rotundatæ, faretæ, superne ad pulvillos plicatæ et arcu viridiore notatæ. Pulvilli lin. 3—4 distantos parvuli, grisei. Aculei primo subregulariter disprositi, 7—9 radiantes cum centrali 1; sed mox (aculeis novis enascentibus) sine numero ac ordine normali erecto-patuli, graciles, brunnei, 3—4 paulum validioribus, lin. 5 longis. " " C. stems erect columnar, subglaucescent light green, 6-7 angular ribs are turgid with a blunt apex, ribs are crenelated-folded, forming the aspect of an inverted wavy-edge towards the areoles, and an intensified green color is noted to follow the arcs. Areoles are sunken and gray-felted, spines rigid, short & brown, in young areoles 8-10, in older areoles 18-20, with 3-4 stiff, sharp-pointed spines that are more powerful. (Nob.) Stem extending 8-10 thumb-widths, almost 2 thumb-widths in diameter. Ribs rounded, faretris [quiver?], above the areoles are folds and curving marks in richer green. Areoles are grey and separated by 3-4 lines. Slender, brown spines that are at first are fairly regularly distributed, with 7-9 radials and 1 central; but soon (in the newly grown spines) form without any order to the numbers, even on the 3-4 that are widely separated and a little more powerful, 5 lines long." Comments: Lin. = Lines/Linea. This was an English unit of measurement possessing multiple definitions with differing lengths. The one most often used by botanists was 1/12th of an inch. It was never included in the official list of units of measurements. (A machinist's line was 1/10th of an inch but there are several other equivalencies in addition to those two.) However. There is a problem here where I clearly lack some understanding. As a unit of measurement 1/12th of an inch is too short for what is being described when comparing this to the assorted later versions that seem to be mere retellings of this description being expressed in cm. It seems more likely to have used 1/10th of an inch (2.54 mm). Nob. = "Nobis" "Nobis" means "I/We (did this)" in reference to the describer of the species -- which in this case appeared to be Otto.

 pollicari Appears to mean, in this application, a "thumb-width". (Förster later commented that Salm-Dyck's plant was 20-25 cm tall and 5 cm wide so this seems like a reasonable translation.) IMHO the height of a plant in a description should not be based on a rather small potted specimen. Of course that seems like a trivial complaint considering the units of measurement that were being employed. ----------------------------------- J. Labouret. 1853. Monographie de la Famille des Cactées 352 [Cited by Schumann (in Martius) in reference to macrogonus.] Pertinent points are grey-felted areoles and short brown spines with 3-4 longer spines up to 10 cm appearing irregularly. p. 352 "65. Cereus Macrogonus (hort. Berol). Synonymie Cereus Macrogonus hort. Berol. --- id. Salm.Cact. in hort. Dyck., cult., p. 203. --- id. Forst. Handb. dr. Cact., p. 391. Patrie? Diagnostic. Tige dressée, columnaire, vert gai glaucescent, 6-7 côtes; côtes gonflées, très-obtuses, convexes vers le sommet de la plante, vers les aréoles comme pliées, crénelées, chaque courbure des crénelures est accompagné d'une coloration plus intense; aréoles serées, grises, tomenteuses; aiguillons rigides, courts, bruns, les jeunes aréoles en portent 8-10, les anciennes 18-20, érigées, ouvertes, 3-4 intérieurs plus vigoureux. Tige haute de 20 cent. sur près de 5 de diamètre; côtes arrondies, enflées, comme pliées au-dessus des aréoles et marquèes d'un arc plus prononcé; aréoles grises, petites, éloignées de 9-10 millim.; dans la jeunesse, les aiguillons sont disposés assez régulièrement, 7-9 rayonnants avec 1 central, mais bientôt de nouveaux aiguillons qui apparaissent viennent troubler cet arrangement sans qu'il soit possible de recountaïtre rien de régulier dans leur disposition; les aiguillons sont érigés, étendus, grêles, bruns, 3-4 un peu plus vigoureux que les autres, ont environ 10 cent. de long. Floraison? Fleurs? Culture. Serre tempérée pendant l'hiver, plein air en bonne exposition pendant la belle saison. Comme presque tous les Cierges, dressés, columnaires; l'exposition la plus favorable est devant un mur bien exposé en plein midi. " "65. Cereus Macrogonus (hort. Berol). Synonym Cereus Macrogonus hort. Berol. --- id. Salm.Cact. in hort. Dyck., cult., p. 203. --- id. Forst. Handb. dr. Cact., p. 391. Homeland? Diagnostic. Stem erect, columnar, bright green becoming glaucous, 6-7 ribs; sides swollen, very-obtuse, curved toward the apex of the plant, above the areoles it is folded, crenelated, each curvature of the notching is accompanied by a more intense color; areoles are sunken, gray, wooly; spines rigid, short, brown, the young areoles bear 8-10 spines, older areoles 18-20 spines, erect, spreading, 3-4 centrals on the plant are more vigorous than the rest. Stems 20 cm high and nearly 5 cm in diameter; sides rounded, swollen, with a fold above the areoles and marked with a more pronounced arc [of color]; areoles grayed-out, small, separated by 9-10 mm; in young growth, the spines are produced regularly enough, 7-9 radials with 1 central, but soon new spines appear which disturb this arrangement without it being possible to observe anything regular about their distribution; spines are erect, spreading, slender, browns, 3-4 are a bit more vigorous than the others and are approximately 10 cm long. Flowering? Flowers? Culture. Temperate Greenhouse during the winter, full air in good exposure during the nice weather. As with almost all of the erect columnar candelabras; the exposure most favorable is in front of a wall with good midday exposure. " ----------------------------------- C. F. Förster. 1886. Handbuch der Cacteenkunde in ihrem ganzen Umfange (by Theodor Rümpler) Volume 2: 706. [Carl Friedrich Förster] "18. Cereus macrogonus Hort. berol., Dickkantiger Kerbencactus. Vaterland nicht bekannt. Stamm aufrecht, säulenformig, etwas bläulich. Kanten 6—7, aufgetrieben, sehr abgestumpft, gegen die Spitze hin geschweift, an den Stachelpolstern gekerbt-gefaltet und durch eine lebhafter grüne Bogenlinie markirt. Stachelpolster gedrängt stehend (7—9 mm), klein, graufilzig. Stacheln steif, kurz, braun, auf jüngeren Polstern 8—10, auf älteren 18—20, aufrecht-abstehend, 3—4 länger (11 mm), als die übrigen. Die vom Fürsten Salm wie oben beschriebene Pflanze war 20—25 cm hoch bei einem Durchmesser von fast 5 cm. Die Stacheln stehen anfangs ziemlich regelmässig, 7—9 Randstacheln und 1 Mittelstachel; bald aber vermehrt sich ihre Zahl und die Regelmässigkeit der Anordnung wird dadurch gestört. Blüthen scheint man nicht beobachtet zu haben. " "Cereus macrogonus Hort. Berol., Thick-edged Notch-Cactus. Homeland unknown. Stem erect, columnar, slightly bluish. Ribs 6-7, swollen, very blunt, curved towards the tip, notched-folded at the areoles and strongly marked by a lively green curving line. Areoles pushed upright [gedrängt stehend] (7-9 mm), small, grey-felted. Spines stiff, short, brown, on younger areoles 8-10, 18-20 on older areoles, upright-spreading, 3-4 are longer (11 mm) than the others. The plant described by Prince Salm was 20-25 cm high with a diameter of almost 5 cm. The spines are initially fairly uniform, 7-9 radial spines and 1 central spine; but soon their numbers increase and the regularity of the arrangement becomes disturbed. Flowers do not appear to have been observed. " ----------------------------------- W. Watson. 1889. Cactus Culture For Amateurs The opening illustration in the book Cactus Culture For Amateurs shows a cactus collection that includes an early image of Cereus macrogonus. This is the earliest illustration of this species that I have been able to locate. ----------------------------------- B. von Ladenberg. 1893. Monatsschrift für Kakteenkunde. 3: 70- . "Die Kakteen und Sukkulenten auf der internationalen Ausstellung in Gent." On page 71 is a photo of a plant display assembled for the International Exhibition at Gent that features a Cereus macrogonus. The scan that is available online is inadequate to show good detail. This is the oldest photographic image of Cereus macrogonus that I have been able to locate. It is the tall single column on the left of the center assemblage. (The text described macrogonus as being on display in this image.) Image from page 71: ----------------------------------- To be continued: When we continue, an enduring glitch will be thrown into the picture.