these people claim t. macrogonus is the same as t. pachanoi

[DiscoStu]

In our opinion the three names (Trichocereus macrogonus, T. pachanoi and T. peruvianus) correspond to only one species because of the glaucous epidermis of the stems, the low number of ribs (6−9, but rarely as low as 4), which are obtuse, near 2 cm high and 2.5 cm wide, with furrows immediately distal to the areoles, and dull seeds, which have a dorsal crest.

identity and neotypification of cereus Macrogonus, the type species of the genus Trichocereus (cactaceae)

http://www.cactusconservation.org/CCI/library/pdf/Albesiano_Kiesling_2012_Haseltonia_17_24-34.pdf

i'm not feeling it

[djmattz0r]

poppycock

pure hogwash

[phytolator]

what's the point?

the cacti are distinct, so are they suggesting they be referred to as botanical varieties or cultivars instead of species?

bloody semantics

[mr b.caapi]

Has got to be the most disputed species ive ever come across.

[Stillman]

check out some of MSmith and Truchas threads. I tend to agree that they are all part of a greater species merely cultivars potentially created through ancient cultural/ religous uses. Lots of info out there and I think there really never will be a right or wrong answer.

[myco]

i think your right there stillman in that they are all part of a greater species and likely merely cultivars potentially created through ancient cultural/ religious uses.

and yes its very likely that they will never come to a real answer

I only own 2 macrogonus but they both definitely have some big differences between them

one is Tipz macro the other is EG's Blue Macro and i can tell you they look very VERY different

however going just of the looks of them both

to me they almost seem like some kind of cross between peruvianus and something else possibly even bridgesii

there ​definitely seems to be predominately peruvianus in there if you ask me

however as stated above i dont think there will ever be a definitive answer to this

i'd love to know more about it but its pretty unlikely there will be any definitive evidence to prove where exactly this species/cultivar originates from

unfortunately i would have to disagree with allot of the findings from trouts notes no disrespect trucha but alot of your stuff is a little confusing and ill informed

i dont claim to be an expert of any kind on cacti

however i did read some of your work and i thought this persons review summed it up quite well

http://www.trichocereus.com/trouts_snout.htm

as i say I'm know expert and i mean no disrespect I'm sure you probably know a whole lot more than i do about this stuff

but at the same time after reading some of your work and then finding this review this person seemed to hit the nail on the head as to my thoughts on what i had read of your work

again no disrespect and i am know expert but trouts work seems to deliver nothing but even more confusion

[Philocacti]

The way I see it, while Trout is concerned with Trichocereus genus, Kate is concerned to diss Trout.

While she's trying to prove her point by trying to make Trot's work seem nonesense and his audience just a bunch of mescaline junkies and the same time she's selling trichocereus cuttings under the name "Legendary sacred cactus".

Why the hell is she calling it "sacred"?

After reading M S Smith, Trout and Archeae's notes and discussions, I also come believe, at this point in time, that T. Pachanoi, macrogonus and peruvianus are variants or subspecies.

But like you, I'm no expert.

[zelly]

unfortunately i would have to disagree with allot of the findings from trouts notes no disrespect trucha but alot of your stuff is a little confusing and ill informed

i dont claim to be an expert of any kind on cacti

however i did read some of your work and i thought this persons review summed it up quite well

http://www.trichocereus.com/trouts_snout.htm

Holy Crap myco, do you really believe the bullshit coming out of zircon6? wow. You should spend a few years reading his ebay listings, you see the man for what he truly is. Outside of ebay, he does not exist. Please cite or post links to his published papers on tricho's or any other subject for that matter.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/San-Pedro-cactus-18-Trichocereus-Pachanoi-6-lbs-10-SP18-/161136912210

Philo- the guys name is Zircon6 on ebay, and he claims

Many years later, after Kate died, I harvested her decades old stand that was the mother of all my amazingly sacred San Pedro.

In other words, he ripped off Kate, long after she had died. Then to add fuel to the fire, he trademarks her name as his..

when the only way you can make your shit look good is by slamming someone else, well that in itself should speak volumes.

[Philocacti]

Zelly - thanks for clearing this out.

Sorry Kate (RIP)

[hostilis]

The guy zircon6 doesn't know jack shit about trichs. It's funny that he rips on trucha so much when he really doesn't know what he's talking about. I asked him a few questions on ebay about his TBM's. It was a simple question if they were clone A or B. I got this response which I found kind of weird, "It was rescued from Kate's nursery after she died. You can ask her if you know how. I don't. Sorry. Verne" He claims that everything trout says is wrong but he doesn't even know if his TBM's are clone A or B.

[EthnoGuy85]

I mean the guys name is zircon as in fugazi. Ya know a fake diamond.

His name should tell you enough and anyone that tells someone that their plants are dying or growin poorly because something is wrong with them isn't the kinda person I wanna be supporting with my hard earned cash.

His TBM's look like the short jointed variety to me. However you wanna call it A/B

[slice]

zircon6 of ebay and his websites : www.sacredcactus.com, etc...

He is so simple minded and so hateful... , really, cant be taken seriously. His online comments about Trout or Karel K are ridiculous to say the least. Hypocritical and quite naif... this thing with his pets is weird also... maybe he is a disturbed person, I mean with bad mental health...

Edited January 11, 2014 by slice

[hostilis]

Yeah, when I asked him about one it had very long sections so I asked him if they were short jointed or long jointed (I made sure to clarify what clone a and b are). But after further inspection i came to the conclusion that they were the short jointed.

It seems to me that he just bashes on others for attention and to discredit others in the field.

Edited January 11, 2014 by hostilis

[slice]

I think he is making a lot o money selling to people that are using for consumption and he wants to play the "puritan" role for fear he might draw attention to his operation... simple.

Edited January 11, 2014 by slice

[DiscoStu]

anyway, here's some pictures of t. macrogonus/peruvianus/pachanoi seed and t. bridgesii seed

http://cactiguide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9908

[M S Smith]

Trout's done more to help the lay enthusiast understand the genus than anyone, even if that means pointing out the difficulties in gaining a clear understanding. That some are incapable of sifting the wheat from the chaff and lauding the one while providing constructive criticism of the other points towards intellectual laziness and an overabundance of self-interest.

~Michael~

[trucha]

People really get too hung up on plant names and name proposals. What people propose we call things is done for our benefit so we can use the same word to mean the same thing. It really does not mean anything about the plants themselves. Its just something someone put into words concerning yet another proposal for how we are to agree to view and organize them. Whether people start using new names is entirely a matter of history in the making.

It can get complicated when discussing something like species which is more often a work in progress than a finished product.

Verne of sacredcactus.com has a long standing axe to grind for me despite the fact that I've never actually met him.

I suspect that it all stems from me telling him to get stuffed back in 1998 when he demanded that I either change the name of Sacred Cacti or else stop selling my book - then being produced in its second edition. He claimed his buying the domain name sacredcactus somehow gave him ownership over my book title.

His book review of San Pedro is just a mean spirited way of attacking me. I feel sad for the guy. Its got to be toxic carrying around so much anger for so many people over what are really all rather trivial issues (me being just one of a decent number of people who he spews verbal poison at). He is probably suffering from something chronic or has some sort of problem that leaves him in pain all of the time. Its not normal for healthy people to be so vile for no good reasons.

I don't know anyone credible who shares his opinions. See comments from a few other people at http://www.accurateinformationmedia.com/comments.htm

But really, people can make up their own minds for themselves since the book is available online in PDF form to anyone who wants a copy.

Most of Verne's comments are things he made up.

My favorite point of amusement was the page he created to trying to show that I don't know a yellow cactus growing in sun would be greener if growing in shade and the attempt to use that weird straw dog to dismiss the existence of Kimura's double lineage of crested pachanoi color forms with matching stocks. Neither one of which is yellow. Since a photo of both of them growing together is included within the pages of the very same book I can only guess that Verne never actually read it before wiping his ass with it.

Its sad people believe it but I'd be curious as to the points that you agree with, Myco.

There actually are no experts in this area. I've certainly never misrepresented myself as an expert. I've always presented San Pedro as my attempt to chronicle the confusion I was finding in horticulture during 1997-2005. Nothing I present there is some sort of names people should use, typically the names in San Pedro include an indication of who was growing it or where inside of parenthesis following the name that was on its label. I don't make much judgement about those, I just present them the way they were encountered. Which includes some serious confusion in a couple of noteworthy areas such as macrogonus - peruvianus.

I think a lot of people either failed to read or pay attention to the opening comments on the naming and took those for actually being the names of those plants.

If people started growing in more recent years they may have no clue what it took to find a bona fide peruvianus in the 1990s. I know Michael recalls as he and I have been corresponding since the days of snail mail.

The first pedro I planted was a pachanot in summer of 1973 and, living in Texas beginning two years later, it was quite a lot of effort to acquire any another interesting Trichs than that one -- at least until around twenty or so years later or if a person was willing to grow them from seed. Now its a quite different world and many dozens of great horticultural offerings can be found.

Edited January 12, 2014 by trucha

[gtarman]

I believe it was old mate Bill Shakespeare who said, "A cactus by any other name would smell as sweet."

...or something like that

[myco]

Holy Crap myco, do you really believe the bullshit coming out of zircon6? wow. You should spend a few years reading his ebay listings, you see the man for what he truly is. Outside of ebay, he does not exist. Please cite or post links to his published papers on tricho's or any other subject for that

Edit: hit the bloody post button before I even typed anything

Sorry as I said I'm no expert and I actually know nothing of this person zircon6

Or Kate or whatever the hell they call them selves

I probly should have looked into them more I did think it seemed a little like an attack on you trucha

The main thing I agreed with was well

Basically from what I had read of trouts notes I myself had found it very confusing but then that may just be me I really didn't get anything out of what I had read other than more confusion about everything

Again maybe that's just me

After that I went on google and just looked at some reviews wich I have to say where all good reviews

I think I then added the word confusing to my search and found that review

and I thought alot of it I kinda got the same impression it was hard for me to read and walk away feeling like I'd really learnt much from it

I have been meaning to continue reading it though so maybe my opinion will change

And it will start to make some more sense to me

Again trucha i cant stress it enough I mean no disrespect to you or your works

Infact I commend you for your works

Atleast you have made an attempt at it there's not alot of people doing as much as you are and have

To shed some light on this stuff

Also I definately will be wary of this zircon6 person thanks for pointing this put to me guys

I was not aware that this person has some kind of beef against trout I just looked at it as a review

Edited January 12, 2014 by myco

[trucha]

And Myco, I'm not leveling criticism or looking to argue. I'm just looking for education of areas I can improve and welcoming anything you want to share.

Feel free to take your time or to take this in layers -- or even to take this offline into email. Time has proven repeatedly that people who disagree with me are often the most valuable people I have to learn from. Thanks!

[myco]

I'm not looking to argue either buddy don't worry

I have alot of respect for you to be honest

[2XB]

People really get too hung up on plant names and name proposals. What people propose we call things is done for our benefit so we can use the same word to mean the same thing. It really does not mean anything about the plants themselves. Its just something someone put into words concerning yet another proposal for how we are to agree to view and organize them. Whether people start using new names is entirely a matter of history in the making.

It can get complicated when discussing something like species which is more often a work in progress than a finished product.

I agree, words are learnt and everyones' interpretation of a word is as unique as their own finger prints. Plants existed long before a need to classify them arose ;-)

[slice]

I feel sad for the guy. Its got to be toxic carrying around so much anger for so many people over what are really all rather trivial issues (me being just one of a decent number of people who he spews verbal poison at). He is probably suffering from something chronic or has some sort of problem that leaves him in pain all of the time. Its not normal for healthy people to be so vile for no good reasons.

wise words

[paradox]

a bit random & is a little cryptic in a sense but it came to mind so..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RltIUKEpukg

Edited January 12, 2014 by paradox

[DiscoStu]

they should just lump everything together into trichocereus confusioid amirite?