Jump to content
The Corroboree
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Philocacti

Peruvianus or Macro?

Question

So after reading this thread I became more lost as what to consider peruvianus and what is pachanoi, but from what I gathered is that pachanoi grows faster and is skinnier and has shorter spines.

Well I bought some T. pachanoi seeds from a well known german vendor on 2 different orders. All the time I thought they were pachanoi and when I posted some pictures of the seedlings a member told me (I think it was Archaea) said that they were T. peruvianus seedlings. Anyway, I don’t have any T. peruvianus but these seedlings are kind of slow compared to my bridgesii seedlings and the coszcoensis. They have long spines and large areols. So what do you guys think. Are they pachanoi or peruvianus?

P1040888.jpg

P1040889.jpg

P1040890.jpg

P1040891.jpg

P1040898.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

the seed may have been collected from a pachnoi, if so it was probably pollinatd by a peruvianus of sorts. pachnoi have very small and very fine spines.

they look like what most people would call a peruvianus. how many seeds did u germinate? i dony know anything about macro but im assuming macrogonus is a peruvianus variety..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Hi Quixote, the one in your pic looks like KK1670 Trichocereus Longispinus. Its a nomen nudum, what means its not an accepted scientific name. Its rather some form of Peruvianus that has brown padded areoles. Yours remind me of it. Could also be Peruvianus KK338. I´ve seen pics where it looked similar.

Both look very similar but i dont know if they are the same. The ribs in Phillocactis pic are a little bit more sharp and the color is more greyish. Could be enviromental but i think its a pale version of Trichocereus Macrogonus thats very common in Europe. I think its a knize number.

Edited by Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks EG. Could only find this pic of Longispinus, and it seems to have much longer spines than mine, but again: maybe it will grow them when older?

http://community.webshots.com/photo/fullsize/2378844940075508785NMZpYj

(site doesnt allow copying the pic address)

As for the threadstarter's cactus, I think they look extremely similar to mine, but yes, the brown areoles are a difference. Somebody told me it might be because some brown fertilizer was used ? I dont know if it is the case. But the colour can change a lot because of the lighting the day the pic was shot, and the camera used. So many variable unknown factors :)

Edited by Quixote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Somebody told me it might be because some brown fertilizer was used ?

No that would be very unlikely. Its just an characteristic of this particular Type. The color tone of the skin as an example is one of the most variable characteristics so its definately no reliable criteria. Spination pattern is pretty much unaffected from enviromental factors so its one of the most important things to look at.

Edited by Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Somebody told me it might be because some brown fertilizer was used ?

No that would be very unlikely. Its just an characteristic of this particular Type. The color tone of the skin as an example is one of the most variable characteristics so its definately no reliable criteria. Spination pattern is pretty much unaffected from enviromental factors so its one of the most important things to look at.

 

Thanks for sharing your genius :) As a cactus newbie, it's sometimes difficult what to believe.

About spination, is it true that these types of cacti start out with dense spination and then later develop the sparse/weak spine clusters that are seen by many as typical of T.Pachanoi?

Or will the spines stay the same, just grow a bit in size as the plant matures?

Edited by Quixote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Trichocereus peruvianus, no such thing as "macrogonus".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I disagree about spinarion not being very affected by envirnoment. I live at a northern lettitude and grow in partial shade. Most plants that I aquire from further south (California or Arizona) grow with shorter spines in my environment - often dramatically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Spine growth IS effects by environment!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Trichocereus peruvianus, no such thing as "macrogonus".

Teotz, i know that. But its a plant name that many people labeled their plants with so it can be used to differentiate between clones. I would be happy to call em all peruvianus but im pretty sure that wont be happening as there are too many old growers using the names from the past. You cant call every plant just Trichocereus Peruvianus or it will end it total chaos. Somehow you need to differntiate between the places of origin. And you telling everyone there is no such thing macrogonus isnt helping if someone gets into cactus growing. I agree there SHOULDNT BE a macrogonus, but somehow you need to find a category or variety name for those kind of plants. Because they DO exist and they are diffrent from others. I agree its not enough to justify their own name. But they have some traits that would at least justify a variety. And before even doing that, we need to rethink what justifies a new species and what not. Because there are species in other families, that were described because of minor differences than the ones responsible for Trichocereus macrogonus getting its own name. I wanna say, if you rename TR. Macrogonus to Peruvianus, you need to re-organise the COMPLETE Cactus system. You know, the confusion already starts with the term species. What does a cactus need to have to deserve its own species name? Really, think about it. Because in case of the diffrent macros i came across, there were huge differences in regard to spine lenght, rib shape, color tone etc. Using the terms of nowadays cactus taxonomy, i would be surprised they would be thrown into Peruvianus. But i agree, its just a very variable species. Doubt taxonomists will accept that though as it would shatter their taxonomic system. If you start lumping em all into Trichocereus Peruvianus, you need do it everywhere.

Also it doesnt matter if spine lenght or color varies a little bit if the type of spination is pretty much staying the same. The Enviroment isnt able to change the DNA of the cactus and its always possible to recognize the type of spination minus the few enviromental influences. You know, people just dont suddenly grow a sixth finger either only because they expose their hand to rain and sun. I give you that it may look a little bit shitty but it would still be a perfect 5-fingered hand. From all the factors that are, the spination is one of the most reliable to get closer to the ID. I´ve seen so many cacti in my life and all of them were a little bit diffrent in regard to skin tone, rib shape, etc. But all were recognizable by their spination. If not directly, as soon as they were growing in a healthy enviroment.

Edited by Evil Genius
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Spine growth IS effects by environment!

 

Dont genetics play a part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

looks like a terschekki or werdermanius in the second last photo.

the wee one in the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

1st i would like to thank you EG for all the effort you did to open this thread :)

Well i bought 200 peruvianus seeds and very few germinated and turned out to be T. cozcoensis, although they also offer T. cozcoensis seeds.

I also bought 200 pachanoi seeds and most germinated and these are the ones i kept and a few more that i didn't post pictures of.

I also germinated 100 seeds of macro but only one germinated and it looks different, areols, spines and probably the rib structure. I'll take a picture tomorrow and post a picture.

I'm not saying these aren't macro as i don't know what macro looks exactly and what differentiates them from peruvianus. Hell these were supposed to be pachanoi :D

I've been re-reading the pinned threads in about macro and peruvianus to learn more and try to understand more.

I don't see much of a difference between my seedlings and those of Quixote, but it might be because my inexperienced eyes. However, maybe my mines are paler because of all the dust we have blowing in the air and ribs might also look different because of the intense sun or something.

So what i gathered so far, maybe im just making this up, is that macro and peruvianus grow slower than pachanoi. In the thread about the fastest trichocereus a lot of people said that their pachanois were extremely fast, these seedlings are not fast in any way, but they are much fatter than my other trichos.

I'll read more and maybe i can clear my thoughts about this topic ;)

Thanks everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

By the way, what are those white markings on the 3rd pic from the top? My cactus has a bit of that too, and I was wondering...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Looks like scarring from an old infection/sunburn/damage etc. Nothing i would worry about per se. But spidermites sometimes cause it too so make sure you dont have any. bye EG

Edited by Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

i planted them in the same pot as seedlings so when they got to this size the spines were injuring the next cactus, so every seedling has a few injuries

here is a pic of how they were before i transplanted them

P1040878.jpg

the tall one is a "Bridgesii X SS02"

the one in the 2nd pic from the last is a T. chiloensis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks for sharing. Whats that thing in the upper right of the picture? A seed pod?

edit: ah im blind. Its a graft, right?

Edited by Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

hahahaha, yes it's a graft, actually it's the T. macro (the only seed that germinated)on perskiopsis.

I cut the the tip a while back, so this is only a pup of the grafted stump. The other tip rooted and is much bigger, so ill post a pic of it tomorrow to compare with the other seedlings already posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Dont genetics play a part?

Of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

So the only macro seed that germinated was grafted to pereskiopsis and i took 2 cuttings and left a piece on the perskiopsis to pup more.

Here are some pics of it to compare with the specimens above

P1040900.jpg

P1040904.jpg

and the pup on the pereskiopsis

P1040907.jpg

the areols are totally different, of course this is only one clone so i don't know if the rest of the seeds would have displayed the same areol character if they had germinated.

Let me know what you think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Nice plant, i like it. Will probably turn out to be very similar to a plant that i bought as "Blue Velvet" what i believe to be a madeup bs name. Just take a look at my Autumn or summer pics from 2011.

It looks a lot like some of the macros i grew from köhres seed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Nice plant, i like it. Will probably turn out to be very similar to a plant that i bought as "Blue Velvet" what i believe to be a madeup bs name. Just take a look at my Autumn or summer pics from 2011.

It looks a lot like some of the macros i grew from köhres seed.

 

I bought all my seeds from them ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Yeah thats the reason why those kind of plants are so common in Europe. Köhres is one of the few sources that can deliver Trichoseed with an acceptable germination rate. They dont come from knize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Yeah they are great, but not all their tricho species have good germination rate. Only 1 macro from a 100 germinated. All they fat slow growers trichos didn't germinate. When i told them, they offered me free seeds with the same price i lost and i told them i would want to have the free seeds the year after so i can guarantee that they are fresh. And the next year year when i mailed them they sent the free seeds very fast.

Great service.

If this post is breaking the law let me know and i will remove it

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
Sign in to follow this  

×