gilligan Posted March 26, 2008 Hi, Y'all... I'm just wanting to know what this is... I thought initially it was a scop, but the spines say not? Thinking it may be super pedro? Cheers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 tonic Posted March 26, 2008 Definitely looks alot like a Super Pedro Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 marsha Posted March 26, 2008 thats super pedro the melborne hhh one i got a cupple from the shop in my travels think there 2 super pedros hehe the non hh one lol, i recon it a cordobensis only cos i was over a gardners house in adelaide and he had one he beleived to be cordobensis! theres my logic and bodgy botany problem solved! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 M S Smith Posted March 26, 2008 If you accept the designation "T. cordobensis" then that is certainly what it looks like...but of course this name came from my collection and a plant I received under that name from NMCR, and nothing says anything about the validity of the name. Otherwise it is just one of two known varieties of T. scopulicola, the other being the standard form with the very short spines. ~Michael~ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 gilligan Posted March 27, 2008 If you accept the designation "T. cordobensis" then that is certainly what it looks like...but of course this name came from my collection and a plant I received under that name from NMCR, and nothing says anything about the validity of the name. Otherwise it is just one of two known varieties of T. scopulicola, the other being the standard form with the very short spines.~Michael~ Michael, thanks for that... I thought it may have been a scop. The plot thickens, however... Does this mean that the 'super pedro' nom de plume that gets bandied around is, in fact, this form of the scop (or again the T. cordobensis?). I've seen a few pics like this now, most of which call it the super pedro... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 shruman Posted March 27, 2008 Hey Michael, do u have photos in habitat? Just for confusion Rev got some cuts in WA (apparently theres abit of this one over there) that he called 'spiney scop' which he now believes is synonymous with super pedro/cordobensis. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 M S Smith Posted March 27, 2008 I bet the name "super pedro" comes from someone thinking it was just a super sized T. pachanoi, and just for clarity, the "super pedro" may or may not be the same as the plant called "T. cordobensis," but it is clear that the "super pedro" and "T. cordobensis" are both some form of T. scopulicola. It should be pretty clear now that in any "species" there seems to be a degree of variability. You can see it in the proper T. pachanoi, in T. peruvianus, T. cuzcoensis, T. chilensis, T. bridgesii, etc, and there should be little reason to not expect some variability in T. scopulicola. I think we got so used to the morphological regularity of the "predominant clone" T. pachanoi that we started to think that other "species" of Trichocereus were similar. Opps, back to the subject...even the regular short spined T. scopulicola can get to be a pretty thick diameter in its own right, quite a bit in excess of most T. pachanoi ("predominant clone") sorts, but from what I can tell this "spiney scop" can get even bigger. This has played out in comparisons of my own T. scopulicola and "T. cordobensis" even though I don't have the best environment. As for Bolivian habitat photos of T. scopulicola (of any sort), well I have had no luck whatsoever...something that really disappoints me. But I do appear to have photos of a T. scop growing near a cottage in Chile. It's just a small limb though, but you can tell it's T. scopulicola. It probably was planted there. ~Michael~ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 t st tantra Posted March 27, 2008 the plants in adelaide originated from the abg,labled t scopicola. prob circulated among the various bgs around oz and prob collecters too. when it didnt look like the scops i was seeing elsewhere i looked online and the best description i could find was the cordobensis.so i decided to call it that until i got a better opinion,which i now have .thanx michael! super pedro and this scop look very similar and could be the same plant grown in different conditions.my super pedro is small and comes from a different climate.my scop is mature. i'm interested to see how the super pedro changes. t s t . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 strangebrew Posted March 28, 2008 I think the plant shown above is Superpedro, that little wiggle of the upper rib margin gives it away as the standard ozzie scopulicola doesn't display that. What determines if a plant should be classified as scopulicola rather than hybrid? Other than the look of the growing tip when viewed from above and the rougher skin and some girth, my Superpedro is much more pachanoid in every other way. I have the misfortune of seeing all my plants in drought stricken mode atm and the superpedro doesn't get those shrunken, horizontal lines between the areoles like the common ozzie scopulicola does. I'm also surprised at how glaucous Superpedro can get. P.S. Love to see some pics of this other cordo/scop beasty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 watertrade Posted March 28, 2008 ****mini hijack**** I have been wondering this for a while... what/who is NMCR? ****hijack over**** Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 strangebrew Posted March 29, 2008 New Mexico Cactus Research - a American nursery that's now defunct? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 shruman Posted March 29, 2008 I realy do'nt know wether cordo & super pedro are synonymous, I had a piece of cordo but killed it after a couple of years & have none anymore, I have SP now & think they might be different, the cordo just seemed more regular scop with longer spines but the SP just looks less scopy to me then cordo did. But yeah i will have to get them side by side & watch them for a few years before I make up my mind. Unless someone convinces me otherwise 1st . Do u think these forms could be similiar to the 'PC'?, & not actualy be found in habitat?, or possibly be a natural hybrid or intermediary? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 strangebrew Posted March 31, 2008 So who's got a cordo? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 genki Posted March 31, 2008 oops, i voted other because i didnt see super pedro. my vote is for scop x pach Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 fractium Posted April 6, 2008 Maybe im just a bit of a noob.... but dont scops have 6 ribs and pedros/ super pedros 7? The base has 6 ribs though, how does the pup only have have 5? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 Evil Genius Posted April 6, 2008 (edited) Hi Fractium! Good Question. According to Friedrich Ritter, a pure Scop has 4 to 6 Ribs. Most of the time, it has 5! If this Super Pedro is a hybrid, it´s not foreseeable how many Ribs it is able to develope at max though! bye Eg Edited April 6, 2008 by Evil Genius Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 PD. Posted April 7, 2008 Maybe im just a bit of a noob.... but dont scops have 6 ribs and pedros/ super pedros 7? Rib numbers vary alot Fractium, super pedro generally has 5 - 7 ribs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 fractium Posted April 8, 2008 So different numbers of ribs are just luck of the draw, rather than an indication of a sub species? Is it common for pups with a different number of ribs to be produced? There goes my quick identification methodology Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 strangebrew Posted April 13, 2008 Hi Fractium! Good Question. According to Friedrich Ritter, a pure Scop has 4 to 6 Ribs. Most of the time, it has 5! If this Super Pedro is a hybrid, it´s not foreseeable how many Ribs it is able to develope at max though! bye Eg I've got a common ozzie scop (Paradisia/Gardenworld's) now about 1.5m tall that has had 7 ribs from the start and seems happy staying that way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 trucha Posted June 2, 2008 A longtime grower near Nimbin who has spent time studying under a Peruvian achuma shaman told me this is actually a pachanoi form that was field collected and imported to Oz from Ecuador by an Australian collector many years ago. I hope to have that collector's name and more collection data soon. Flowering shows almost no differences from what would be expected for a typical South American pachanoi. Lots of people think it is a scopulicola and this was what I was told it was at first. THe person telling me this later deferred to the opinion of the person I mentioned above when asked. Having some cladistic work done would be nice as this seems the only way to resolve it. Rib numbers often mean almost nothing. Scop can run from 4 to 8 on what I've seen. 5 or 6 has been most common. Pachanoi in the hands of large growers and also examined in Peru by the people who used to run the BPC has been seen to produce 4-14. 5-8 is more common of course. If you check out the peruvian pachanoi growing in a shaman's garden I posted elsewhere here you will see it has 9 ribs. They can add or lose them as they grow and far too much gets made out of spination and rib numbers than either merits. NMCR = New Mexico Cactus Research is the company of Horst Kunzler. He is still there and active (at least as of last summer) but Horst is getting old now so you have to show up at his door to buy anything. He's put out lots of great plants and lots of problems in ID. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 PD. Posted June 3, 2008 A longtime grower near Nimbin who has spent time studying under a Peruvian achuma shaman told me this is actually a pachanoi form that was field collected and imported to Oz from Ecuador by an Australian collector many years ago. I hope to have that collector's name and more collection data soon. Flowering shows almost no differences from what would be expected for a typical South American pachanoi. Lots of people think it is a scopulicola and this was what I was told it was at first. THe person telling me this later deferred to the opinion of the person I mentioned above when asked. Having some cladistic work done would be nice as this seems the only way to resolve it. Are you talkin "spiney scop" aka "super pedro" trucha??? collection data should be very interesting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0 Teotzlcoatl Posted June 5, 2008 (edited) So different numbers of ribs are just luck of the draw, rather than an indication of a sub species? Ribs number can change at any time during a Trichocereus cacti's life. Tho most have a common number that they stick around... for example, your T. pachanoi will not suddenly devolope 30 ribs. The psychoactive trichocereus normally have from 4-10 ribs, more is uncommon, less than 4 is unhear of. Is it common for pups with a different number of ribs to be produced? Seems to happen alot with my cacti. Edited June 5, 2008 by Teotz' Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hi, Y'all...
I'm just wanting to know what this is...
I thought initially it was a scop, but the spines say not? Thinking it may be super pedro?
Cheers
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites