Jump to content
The Corroboree
  • 0
trucha

How to recognize a macrogonus

Question

I was wondering what features can reliably recognize a macrogonus.

My personal opinion is that if it did not descend from the Berlin Botanical Gardens it can't really be proven to be a macrogonus and that the name and description should be chucked as invalid but that is hardly useful in the real world since so many macrogonuses exist out there that are reliably distinct from the peruvianus sorts.

Some people try to stuff a bunch of clearly peruvianus plants into it (which is clearly wrong since peruvianus branches can grow to around 15 or more feet and those of macrogonus only get to around 6 - sometimes a bit longer if jointed and prostrate)

Awlshaped spines, brown from the start, at least for a short while, seems the only unique thing in the description but this is not reliably true in the real world.

I'd love to hear opinions on how people recognize theirs. Not to find people to disagree with but to try and sort out what makes a macrogonus a macrogonus.

Edited by trucha
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
i am quite curious, why no one here seems to look at seed morphology at all? it is used in many other species, including cacti. why not here?

Trichocereus-macrogonus.jpg

Wait, are those microscopic seed photos? Very cool! I can do pseudo macro, but nothing remotely close to that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Okay I have wanted to post this for ages so here goes...the two cactus in the pictures are both macrogonus...now I have been told that it is envirnmental conditions that makes them look different...but I mean why would the conditions be so different so as to make the two cactus look soooooooo different...those huge white spines from the apical meristam all the way down and the other with it's small delicate red and orange spines all the way around...the short spined one has spent a full year in blazing sun and still gets sun in winter...the large white spined cactus comes from Gilligan and I have no idea what conditions it grew in although I know it's from W.A.....so can anyone explain to me why these are the same cactus, but look sooooo wildly not alike.... :huh: or is one of them not a macrogonus...like humour me, and tell me that the long spined one could be a cuzcoensis... :)

thank you so much.

H.

post-4860-1246788625_thumb.jpg

post-4860-1246788638_thumb.jpg

macro.JPG

macrolong.JPG

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Im gon humour you mate so start laughin old fella cause i reckon tha one on the right is a cuzco type mofo.

macro

im drunk...........

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Yeah, the one on the left is the plant type which commonly gets called T. macrogonus. Whether or not what we call T. macrogonus matches the German holotype plant is unknown, but I've leaned towards these sorts of "T. macrogonus" as intermediates of the T. pachanoi common in Ecuador and northern Peru and the T. peruvianus of central Peru, and in particular, the province of Matucana.

The one on the right is what in the 1990s was considered T. peruvianus, but which I have argued elsewhere is a form of T. cuzcoensis. I can't recall anyone ever positively vouching for such a plants alkaloids, and regardless of whether it is a form of T. cuzcoensis or not there are few knowledgeable people who would defend it as T. peruvianus anymore with one exception being those who have an abundance of it for sale. I've grown so many of these damn things in the past I threw them all over the fence to rot this spring. I probably have a few more of them under different names and numbers, but they're all seedlings and I'll hold on to them until I can see what becomes of them.

Hope that helps and ain't too hilarious. :wink:

~Michael~

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

This year mesa has had what they regard as a thin stem short spine macrogonus on offer, I just ordered some to play with over winter :)

Based on the above post, would it be reasonable to assume such a critter will likely be what we would consider a pach or intermediate?

Anyone started up 1283.441 yet? I couldnt find any pics (I think this year is the first time theyve had it on their list)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×