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

"Spineless bridgesii"

Question

Hey. So, I got this plant from awesome user T-trich as a "spineless bridgesii." I think it looks closer to a spineless scopulicola, but something looks a bit off for that as well. What do yall think?

post-13951-0-63658500-1439422490_thumb.j

post-13951-0-06092100-1439422513_thumb.j

post-13951-0-63658500-1439422490_thumb.jpg

post-13951-0-06092100-1439422513_thumb.jpg

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

It looks like a hybrid, and I can see scop in there I think too.

It's a very distinctive specimen!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Looks like a spineless Scopulicola X Knuthianus! :wink:

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Agree with Zed, definitely some Knuthianus in there.

Very nice plant.

Getafix

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

more or less just looks like a knuthianus to me.. they are very good at dropping their spines. who knows..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I haven't seen knuthianus lose spines before, that's very interesting, Paradox. Do you know which of our knuth clones here in Australia drops their spines? I've seen at least 2 distinct knuth clones here and I have quite a few of one of them. Mine stays spiny so far, even on the ridiculously large 7-8metre mother plant I got my cuttings from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

i only have one, i'm not sure which one it is but it looks a fair bit like the one in the op.. i've noticed that on new growth there is often lots of spines & they often quite quickly fall away leaving just 2 or so spines which turn white after a few months, this seems to often happen even if they aren't physically disturbed.. i noticed that when the spines are fresh & young they all fall off fairly easily when bumped or wiped etc.. lots of trichs do this but in my experience this knuth clone i have does it a bit easier than most..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I agree that it looks knuthianus, but there are no spines emerging out of the new growth at all, paradox. And I haven't seen any knuthianus or cuzco with the epidermis swollen over the areoles like this.

Edited by Ohlone
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Ohlone, yeah but that´s not really a problem. There are some populations of Knuthianus that are somewhat different from the ones that are usually common in Australia. Those probably go back to Ritter, who sold seed to Australia. But Knize also distributed some types that belong to the whole Knuthuanus group and they are just a little bit different. Maybe not totally "pure" in comparance to Ritters typus but they still are related. Knize probably didn´t do it knowingly and I think he simply labeled them as "Peruvianus".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Btw, this type is very common around Tarma. I have pics of this exact type from north Tarma...I would post it but I do not have clearance to give the pic away...but believe me, it´s definitely this type. If I´d have to label it, I´d label it Tarmaensis/Knuthianus. Simply because they are close, grow together and form a lot of intermediates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

You've seen completely spineless types around Tarma, EG? That would be news to me. All of the wild collected seed I've grown from around there has been very spiny, and the variation I've seen in photos hasn't included any spineless (or anywhere close to it) plants. Would be great if you could share those photos!

Edited by Ohlone
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Looks like an odd T. scopulicola x T. bridgesii to me. The epidermis looks matte, i.e., unreflective and slightly rough in texture. Such texture, as well as the folded in areoles seems more like t. scopulicola than anything else to me. Compare to this T. scopulicola I grew from Sacred Succulent seed.

post-19-0-35453600-1439496180_thumb.jpg

~Michael~

post-19-0-35453600-1439496180_thumb.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Could be a bridgesii? Ohlone, can you post a pic of the growing tip, top down?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

post-13951-0-45377000-1439505849_thumb.j

here you go interbeing

post-13951-0-45377000-1439505849_thumb.jpg

Edited by Ohlone
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Is the skin waxy or a little rough when you run your fingernail down it? Still look somewhat like a T. bridgesii x T. scopulicola to me.

~Michael~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

thanks for the input all. the skin is waxy and rough just like my other bridgesiis (and unlike the skin on most/all of my pach and pervus). I'm also leaning towards a bridgesii/scop hybrid.

Edited by Ohlone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

took 2 more photos while I was out there that look essentially the same to me but I figured I'd upload them anyway.

post-13951-0-84674400-1439509738_thumb.j

post-13951-0-66235600-1439509752_thumb.j

post-13951-0-84674400-1439509738_thumb.jpg

post-13951-0-66235600-1439509752_thumb.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Still look somewhat like a T. bridgesii x T. scopulicola to me.

the spineless bridges I've seen are only spineless on the upper portions of mature stems. branch pups & basal pups always have spines.

imo its highly unlikely scop was the pollen donor for this plant, more than likely something along the lines of scop x pach huarazensis or scop x pach ayacucho. the apical meristem & overall girth are both screaming scopulicola with just a touch of something else

i also believe you will not see the plants true form until its planted in the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I was just looking to indicate a cross of the two species and really wasn't thinking about

which was maternal or paternal. As for the need for a plant to be in the ground to grow true to form, well how might the T. scopulicola photo I posted above not be true to form? I could just as easily say a plant is not true to form if growing outside of the species evolutionary niche. Seriously, could one claim that a T. peruvianus growing in a container in Matucana would not grow to form just like one next to it growing in the ground?

~Michael~

Edited by M S Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Michael, perhaps the notches on your scop wouldnt be quite so pronounced if the plant could seek out nutrients and moisture on its own schedule rather than one dictated by you or any other grower growing their plants in pots

I think if you had the experience time after time after time of seeing a plant almost double in girth once planted in the ground you too might come to the same conclusions.

could one claim that a T. peruvianus growing in a container in Matucana would not grow to form just like one next to it growing in the ground?

based on my first hand experiences, absolutely. the one in the pot requires human intervention in terms of watering & nutrients if its roots were never allowed to access the ground. the one in the ground could send roots far & wide seeking out what the plant needs; the one in the pot is at the mercy of the human tending it. again these are just my experiences

now fwiw- some of nitrogens plants are severely root bound in clay pots that are watered very infrequently and are or very recently were, flowering like mad. the stems on his Lumberjack are 1/2 to 1/3 the girth of my Ljacks planted in the ground. we've somewhat concluded his plants are 'sensing' extreme growing conditions and as a result are pushing out flowers in survival mode.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Again, this is NOT a cross or a hybrid. There are WAY more regional types than legit hybrids between two different species available on the market. Of course those types somehow evolved by hybridizing but they are not manmade hybrids and this type is a lot closer to Trichocereus Cuzcoensis than it is to Scopulicola or Bridgesii. You can see that on the young seedlings very well.

This is a type from the north of Tarma and it´s one of the more dominant types there. It belongs to the group surrounding Trichocereus Knuthianus and Trichocereus Tarmaensis. This plant is somewhere in the middle between the spineless ones and the more spinier versions, which also exist and are probably in the majority. Nonetheless, those plants tend to lose their spines later on and younger plants tend to be more spiny. I know that the plant on the pic is not entirely spineless but there are many natural varieties of this type around the area where it grows that actually ARE spineless.

This pic is NOT mine to post and I will remove it in a couple of hours because of courtesy to the copyright owner.

Btw, I´ve been giving away seeds of this type a couple years ago.

post-1140-0-18655900-1439533463_thumb.jp

post-1140-0-18655900-1439533463_thumb.jpg

Edited by Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

^^^^ EG, does the plant in the picture have a bk number associated with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

No it doesn´t. I got that from someone from Peru and I don´t think that SS visited this population. I still have some seeds if you need any. For free of course. Will also put this type in the shop but couldn´t find a pic of it, apart from the one that the collector sent me. And I don´t want to use his pic because I couldn´t ask him yet.

Edited by Evil Genius

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  

×