Trichocereus ID

[hostilis]

My buddy got this new trich. It was labelled as peruvianus, but it looks different to me. But what do I know? I suck at IDing trichs.

Here it is. Any feedback is appreciated.

Thanks!

hostilis

[hostilis]

More pictures. Hehe. Just to drag this thread on even more. Lol.

Here you go!

[M S Smith]

Clearly Trichocereus. I'd put it in with the T. schoenii, T. chalaensis, T, puquiensis sort, which all grow in the same general region, and which bear closer similarity to T. cuzcoensis than T. peruvianus. That you said at The Nook that the person it came from said it was "a variety something 04" keeps me thinking it 's Sacred Succulents' SS04 which they themselves think a T. chalaensis.

~Michael~

[hostilis]

Sweet. I didn't post anything about this over at the nook. Maybe the owner of this plant did.

[M S Smith]

Sweet. I didn't post anything about this over at the nook. Maybe the owner of this plant did.

Oh, maybe so. Some of the same photos. I thought that was you under another name. Check out the thread there.

http://www.thenook.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=86382

~Michael~

Edited January 3, 2014 by M S Smith

[hostilis]

Yeah, that's one of my buddies. He actually owns one of these. I don't, I was just trying to get it ID'd for a friend. I am under the name hostilis on that forum as well.

[Evil Genius]

Yeah, with these Pics it looks a lot more like a Trichocereus! Totally agree!

[hostilis]

Sweet! Thanks for the help everyone.

[magical9]

So guys. As some of you know i was recently at a really nice cactus farm and was toured around the place by the grower himself. He's been at it for over 30 years and he was quite knowledgeable. Somthing that struck me though was that he had at least 6+ LARGE stands of this EXACT same plant. 100% exact same plant. The growth patterns were unmistakable. I know that alot of people talked about the fact that this particular plant looked "hard grown" and that may have lead to its current look and that if grown differently or grown to a larger mature size that it would show different characteristics. The thing is, these stands were old and large and looked 100% exactly the same as my little stand. This makes me think that this plant looks exactly as it should. That is is not hard grown or grown in any odd way to change its normal look of growth. All the stands i saw of this plant were either in shade, or no shade, it didnt effect the growth pattern.

The reason i bring this up and this cactus farmer up is that he was very adamant that it was not a T. Cuzcoensis remarking iether that cuzco is normally bigger around or just more round. I cant remember his exact phrasing. But everytime i saw another stand i would comment how i thought it was a cuzco since it was identical to this plant which alot of people believed to be cuzco. This guy said he knew it was a trichocereus and that it was more peruvianus to him if anything.

EDIT: btw the original cactus in this thread is mine. not sure if that was clear i finally can post! also im quite sure its a T. Cuzcoensis due to its large old spine growth expands at the base just as MS Smith indicated a cuzco does.

Edited January 22, 2014 by magical9