Trichocereus?

[Philocacti]

What do guys this is?

T. werdermannianus, T. tacaquirensis?

Or something else like.

It could be a T. chiloensis but I have no clue

[DiscoStu]

looks a bit like t. knuthianus?

[Evil Genius]

I think that´s the original Trichocereus Glaucus Ritter. Michael should have good pics of it. I think he grew some from seed. Alternatively, this could be a chilensis variety, but as far as I know, the original Glaucus was believed to be a close relative of chilensis anyway.

[Philocacti]

Thanks guys

Bot6 - I'm not familiar with the knuthianus

EG - Looks like the chiloensis on this website

http://www.columnar-cacti.org/trichocereus/index.html

[Evil Genius]

Hi Philocacti, well Glaucus and chilensis are related and some Varieties are even Synonymous. The One of the Columnar Cacti Site is a bit different though. The spines are more curved and look a bit more like the Ones on a regular Chilensis. You know, the grayish white look that old Chilensis Spines have. The Chilensis Version that Columnar Cacti posted could be an Intermediate between the Glaucus Ritter and the regular Chilensis. But that´s just speculation. The biggest difference between the Glaucus and the Chilensis are that the spines on the Glaucus are kinda reddish. But basically, both plants are very similar, if not the same. So what does that mean for the Plant in your Pics? You could name it Glaucus Ritter. You could name it Chilensis. Or Glaucus/ Chilensis Intermediate. Pick the One that you prefer the most. But definitely a Stunning Cactus!

Edited February 7, 2014 by Evil Genius

[DiscoStu]

it looks knuthianus to me. i have one glaucus and it's not very big, i don't think it looks very much like it. it looks more like my knuthianus, to me.

but is there a high likelihood that that cactus in question is a cross between the "original Trichocereus Glaucus Ritter" and a chilensis? i mean, where did OP get the cactus from is that cross a common plant?

​i wonder, quite often, that when identifying plants one needs to take into account the predominant plants in cultivation? like a "ritter glaucus" i don't know and it seems quite uncommon where i come from. is it a common plant that would seem likely to be crossed in cultivation?

i'm not sure, i'm not casting into doubt your knowledge as I respect that but I do question what I read or hear, and that I don't apologise for.

[Evil Genius]

Hi Bot6! This is absolutely not a Knuthianus though there are many similarities. And here is why:

See the spots i marked? Not sure how to describe it but the patters or fields that you see on the new growth are a lot more pronounced than on Knuthianus. Besides, spination is diffrent.And Knuthianus is a massive chunk of a Cactus, even when small. Larger ones look like Trees.

Please post some pictures of your Glaucus. There are many plants labeled as Glaucus that are something entirely else. ID´ing Cacti based on a Label is generally not a good Idea. I gave away seeds labeled Glaucus a few years ago. They were definitely not Glaucus but that´s the label i got them with so i kept it. That being said, they looked very much bridgesoid.

Btw, the Glaucus Ritter is a diffrent One than the One Knize is selling.

Because of your thoughts about a hybrid between chilensis and glaucus. I´m not talking about intentional crosses. In nature, Cacti cross with the ones that grow near them because the pollen is being transported by bees, bats and such. So if you have chilensis growing in Area A and Glaucus growing in Area B, some of the Plants that grow in the middle of them might be intermediates. Means natural Hybrids. Intermediates are everywhere. A large part of the available Cacti can be intermediates without people even recognizing it. How would you know, if not because of the looks? Sometimes it´s very obvious,sometimes not so much. So let´s say Knize cuts down the whole cactus field and calls the plants and seeds from that Area KK331 Glaucus. Because most of them look similar. But you´ll always have Variety in them. Some of these plants might look more like Chilensis, some like Glaucus and some like a mix between them.

In most cases, people dont cross Trichocereus intentionally. So everyone should forget about intentionally created Tricho hybrids when trying to ID a cactus he comes across on ebay. In most cases, it is just a variety, intermediate or natural hybrid. And in nature, plants mate with the Ones that grow near them. That´s how you get regional varieties. Described in a VERY VERY simplificated Way.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Evil Genius

[Philocacti]

Thanks a lot EG, very valuable info

Here's a T. glaucus that I grew from koehres seeds. It's been grafted to pereskiopsis for 2 years but it's extremely slow.

Just checked the label and the one in this pic is T. pascana not glaucus

Sorry for the confusion

Edited February 7, 2014 by Philocacti