ID help. came labelled macro.

[pinegapcontrol]

Hi all, hoping for some thoughts on this one. pics are all of the same cacti. cheers.

[upside]

Not sure,, but do I see boobies in the background of pic 2 ;-)

[Evil Genius]

Oh man, i thought you meant really boobies.

[pinegapcontrol]

pretty sure the one in the background is Cereus Aethiops monstrose

[EthnoGuy85]

I'd leave it labelled as macrogonus unless you are of the school of thought that macrogonus is just a Peruvianus.

[magical9]

i really like the clean look of your garden.

[trucha]

It fits within the most common concept of macrogonus.

Its worth preserving designations like that one. A rush to change labels in order to comply with the conclusions of lumpers often loses information that later may be of value.

[M S Smith]

It fits within the most common concept of macrogonus.

Its worth preserving designations like that one. A rush to change labels in order to comply with the conclusions of lumpers often loses information that later may be of value.

Just curious, do you say that because your current views are leaning towards the primacy of the name T. macrogonus over T. peruvianus, or because you believe there are differences which exclude these particular plants from fitting the most common concept of T. peruvianus?

~Michael~

[trucha]

I like a lot of the thought underlying their proposal but frankly Albesiano & Kiesling have not yet done enough to defend their position -- at least not as far as their suggestions for the nomenclature accompanying the combinations.

I don't like throwing the baby out with the bathwater though.

There is plenty of confusion in horticulture about names and IDs for both macrogonus and peruvianus but the majority of the two peaks are nicely distinguishable based on morphology and floristic features and, whatever name a person wants to saddle them with, at least some of the macrogonus need to be considered as something distinctive enough to recognize as a variety or a form. (Schell 1926 Kakteen has a nice example of a plant we are both familiar with.) We can't discuss this subject adequately here.

I'm hoping to get something long-needed into print on the subject of macrogonus (with parallel treatments of peruvianus and pachanoi) but have been running into a stubbornly persistent point of data acquisition conflict for a while now. This subject really deserves to be treated well, thoroughly and with some rigor. You'll be among the first to hear when those go online.

It really doesn't matter what people prefer to call them -- any name is OK so long as we know which particular plants we are referring to, I never stopped using the name Trichocereus and I suspect no one ceased to understand what I was referring to. (At least not outside of my entirely politically motivated proposal to change from the use of the name Trichocereus to Echinopsis in Ogunbodede prior to its submission for publication.)

Whether macrogonus simply disappears into peruvianus (as you have come to view it) or whether peruvianus simply disappears into macrogonus (as Albesiano & Kiesling came to view it), I would suggest that something of value gets lost.

I know that I've said this before but its worth repeating: I'm a believer that cactus growers should ADD new name tags to their cacti rather than replace the old name tags with new name tags. Even if a plant ends up with a stack of five name tags over time, the stack is not going to be any more confusing to read through than the literature. Its easy to lose pieces of data taking other approaches. Some things which may have no significance to the grower may well prove to have the ability to be illuminated by a visitor.

[pinegapcontrol]

I have it Labelled " T.Macro/T.Glaucus " and info on where i purchased it.

[mutant]

Remembering where you got it from (store/country) is a pretty good idea.

I dont know how accurate my current understanding of macrogonus VS peruvuianus is, but I thought macrogonus is supposed to be spinier (more and more colourful spines and also longer) beside some other morphological differences.

In my eyes these look like a "normal" peruvian, a "true blue" (never gets old) , and to be honest it resembles my "Los Gentiles" quite a lot.

I was given some sorry-ass seedlings some years ago from a friend, he said they're pachanoi... while they were growing I thoght it was a macrogonus, with organge spines and all, but eventually it was just a simple and nice peruvian.

[trucha]

Part of the problems involve growers and horticulturalists not caring about the published descriptions and labelling their plants based on personal preferences. A lot of confusion has been created by people insisting what they had was one or the other (I've heard some growers claim all peruvianus were really macrogonus and others claiming the opposite. A useful point in understanding what is encountered is to look for comments by the speakers about not caring about taxonomy or botany. That goes far towards identifying which conclusions can and should be discounted.)

Macrogonus has consistently shorter spines than peruvianus in general but all of these express a spectrum of variable morphology. Grown side by side peruvianus also tends to become fatter with age.

They aren't separate species from each other or from pachanoi. Whether macrogonus and peruvianus get defined as forms or varieties remains for some botanist to work out in writing.

Pachanoi is likely of a subspecific relationship.

Edited February 2, 2014 by trucha

[Philocacti]

This is a seedling of T. macrogonus seed pack from koehres. It's spines are bigger than some of my cusco. So I'm guessing that labeling seeds by macrogonus will still get you an array of variation. Some will have shorter spines than peruvianus and others will have shorter ones

[hostilis]

I got such horrible germination rates with the macrogronus from koehres. Only about 5 of 100 germinated even with varying levels of gibberelic acid applied.

[Philocacti]

This was the only one that germinated out of a hundred seeds. But I grafted it and have three small similar sized cuttings of it.

However back then I didn't know about all the germination tricks, so maybe if I did them I would of got more to germinate.

After all koehres sent me free bridgesii packs to make up for them ;)

[mutant]

hey trucha

what about pachanoi speed growth compared to peruv or macro?

anywayz, my understanding is that the more you grow them the more you know about them

but if the peruvianus is more spined and the macrogonus less spined, then the los gentiles and true blue and ICARO might fall to macrogonus...

wut a mess. sorry if I have been a source of mess, I huess I should read that trichcereus notes book I own again on species definitions, which I had done for the fatty families, but not with peruvs and pachs and all.

[prier]

Little off topic, but it looks like you're out in the dandenong ranges. A friend of mine moved out that way recently and is a little worried about taking his cacti out there, so i've been looking after em for him. How do they go out there? I'd imagine Trichos wouldn't mind the wet too much, what about other cacti?

[pinegapcontrol]

The Trichs are pretty much fine as long as the drainage is up to scratch, a few bridgesii' get some black spots but they always come good, that usually only happens in summer with prolonged high humidity. my biggest problem is snails and slugs over winter, and wombats knocking off pups.

The lophs will survive outdoors all year but theyre much happier and prettier if theyre under the eves. This one spent at least 3 years outdoors but its under the eves now. All the tufts went stiff and brittle, theyre only just showing signs of recovery and theyve been sheltered for 2 years. no flowers either from that main button anymore.

Theres something happening in the centre of that main button though, you can see some light green coming through in the close up shot.

[mutant]

man the biggest problem I got with lophs is that cats came and messed with them sometime. I remember. got to keep then were cats dont reach..

[trucha]

"hey trucha

what about pachanoi speed growth compared to peruv or macro?

anywayz, my understanding is that the more you grow them the more you know about them

but if the peruvianus is more spined and the macrogonus less spined, then the los gentiles and true blue and ICARO might fall to macrogonus...

wut a mess. sorry if I have been a source of mess, I huess I should read that trichcereus notes book I own again on species definitions, which I had done for the fatty families, but not with peruvs and pachs and all."

A problem is the original descriptions were inadequate and sloppy. A compounding problem is people trying to ID these based on sterile morphology.

Watching them grow into flowering adults is certainly the most valuable element.

There is one helpful point: fruit and flowers. This matters more than spination as spines are variable and can be dramatically affected by growth conditions.

Peruvianus has black and/or dark brown hairs on the axils of the scales and on the ovary and the new felt is brown, macrogonus has less hair overall and when they are NEW the felt and the hairs are typically entirely whitish or grey - sometimes with a spot of light brown on one side of the new areoles.

If I understand right, Icaros and Los Gentiles came from the same populations of plants and were originally sourced from the same people (one just taking one more step in horticulture causing a divergent labelling); those are not just peruvianus but they are from the Type population above Matucana. Icaros was provided by IcarosDNA who distributed a LOT of great seeds and Los Gentiles was a trade name coined by Sacred Succulents who also grew them from Icaro's seeds.

Speed of growth on pachanoi depends on which pachanoi.

[mutant]

thanks a lot trucha..

"Speed of growth on pachanoi depends on which pachanoi."

refering to any pachanoi I got : SAB "2",. OMAR, ALF, PC, KK339, NZ pachanoi, Yowie and even the scop-pach ROB and LANCE (superpedro) are far faster than true scops...

maybe someone should give me a "BLUE" pachanoi... lol and a spineless macro while we are at that...