Trichocereus Peruvianus Short Spine

[cactophyle]

I had written off this cactus of mine as a hybrid, but then I saw some guy selling this online calling it "the real KK242" here: http://kk242notes.tripod.com/

The Sacredcactus website downplays the possibility of this being a KK242, and considers it likely a hybrid as I suspected:

http://www.sacredcactus.com/comparisons.htm#hybrid

The only thing I'm sure of is that the description of the cactus in the first link fits my cactus to a 'T', so at least I know mine is not a lone mutant! The main thing that makes this cactus unique among Trichocereus is how the ribs "disappear" when watered, making it almost round. It is also shiny and slinder (not seeming to grow more than 2.5" wide), with distinct short brown (thin, weak, pointed, 5-7, longer central) spines, and has dark V notches.

What do you think? Should I keep a mother plant and propagate this or just use it for root stock?

Edited March 27, 2009 by cactophyle

[cactophyle]

Here are a several interesting photos of pachanoiXperuvianus hybrids:

1) In these images the pachanoi is the mother and the F1's have a lot of variation, but with one thing in common, and that seems to be somewhat long spines. At least the spines seem considerably longer than mine, and none of these look like mine.

http://largelyaccurateinformationmedia.com...ro_hybrids.html

2) This is a good simple, side by side comparison of what I consider "the original" peruvianus with my short spine type right next to it. [Edit: I've copied and attached it to this post.]

http://www.sacredcactus.com/peruvian_torch6.htm

Mr. Smith posted the following link here in the forum, and the second picture appears to be very similar to my so called "short spined peruvianus". He describes it as "somewhat typical T. pachanoi of Ecuador and Peru." I think this is identical to my cactus.

http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/inde...F%BDentry170425

So now I guess it could be a hybrid, a pachanoi, or a peruvianus. Geesh, I guess all options are on the table. Can someone provide evidence one way or the other?

Edited March 27, 2009 by cactophyle

[Gunter]

I'd offer that T peruvianus and T pachanoi are not different species, just names associated with different phenotypes of the same species.

I have a short spined KK242 plant that i obtained from someone who obtained it from Knize, it is a very nice plant but a little frost tender compared to the thicker bluer forms of peruvianus.

The forms in the top link for the kk242 look very much like other short spined peruvianus forms which are essentially pachanoi forms that have been re-named by people wanting their plants to fit the BS in the information domain about the stronger forms being peruvianus.

[ddd]

When I saw that pic, I thought it was mine:) I have the same clone, purchased around 1999-2000. My pics are in link. Mine grow very fast, but I feed them very well. (peat mix with bone meal, blood meal, lime, 20% castings for the soil. And they get age old organics, castings and mollases for liquid nutes.

It is a VERY dark green cactus. I think it has extra chlorophyll, giving it energy to grow fast. It really likes to reproduce it's self doesn't it?

I've recently done a lot of research on this clone and I've come to the conclusion that it's one in a group of cacti that were collected from the "kk242" region. It may be a cross between a peruvianus and a pedro because of it's vigor, but I'd bet the cross occured in nature.

I'm using it for my first grafting attempts because of it's vigor and desiese resistance.

I'm wondering if the tendancy to pup is a genetic trate of the clone OR is it due to my rich soil and fert regimin?

http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/inde...showtopic=20190

[cactophyle]

That's funny, we both posted about the same clone. I think lots of people must have a clone of this. I think because of the short spines it is attractive as a decoration and easy to handle. Especially for grafting it works exceptionally due to its ability to absorb lots of water and not rot.

I've seen nothing out of the ordinary as far as pups go with mine. They seem just like pachanoi in that respect. Peruvianus and pachanoi do seem very similar in their growth habits, but I hear bridgesii pups more. Perhaps thinner species create more pups because they can't grow as tall without gravity breaking them.

[ddd]

I'm guessing the pupping could be from the lime I add to the soil mix then. Or maybe the Age Old organics Bloom forumula. Or maybe due to the acidity of the peat based mix.

Yea- there's times when I water these every day. The soil is constantly damp or wet and I've never had an issue. I like to "grow it fast" with this clone. I'll push it with water and ferts to keep it plump:)

[M S Smith]

cactophyle, it's just a T. pachanoi, no "KK242" or "short spine" necessary. Don't pay any attention to sacredcactus, especially his idea that your average Ecuador/Peru T. pachanoi are pachanoi x peruvianus because they don't match the plants he typically sells as T. pachanoi, those which K. Trout (Trucha) had referred to a the "pachanot."

~Michael~

[~shameless~]

This has short spines and a exhibits much more in the way of 'peruvian like features'

This is one of my most prized cactus

Comments welcomed ( A few other members have got this!!)

[Gunter]

One group of very interesting peruvianoids is a thick blue form tending to have darker spines, this group is known to have specimens with longer (>5cm) and shorter (<2CM) spines on average. Some of these might be considered short spine peruvianus.

It is odd but while several of my juuls and pachanot X peruvianus plants looks akin to pachanot and juuls, they don't look like the parent peruvianus (often SS01). With hybrids of pachanoid forms and bridgesioid forms the offspring can resemble either parent in the cross, and with the hybrids of the bridgesioids and peruvnianoids they offspring look somewhat uniform but rather in between the parental forms.