Share The Seeds
Gardening Area => Growing questions and answers => Topic started by: plantlight on December 28, 2015, 08:12:21 PM
-
Hey Cacti folks,
Please help me with some plant ID. I’m new to cacti and trying to get started with a few nice specimens of Trichocereus bridgesii, pachanoi, and peruvianus . I started by ordering a sampling from a few different sources. My goal was to obtain identified plants to study and thereby learn the differences.
I have read through some of the discussion on this forum and both The Nook and The Corroboree but still have some questions that I am attempting to simplify. For one, I’ve learned that reclassing the genus Trichocereus to the genus Echinopsis is not accepted by all and it appears from my reading that most collectors prefer Trichocereus. Therefore, I’ll stick with the more familiar Trichocereus names.
Below I’ve copied extracts from Wikipedia describing different species of the genus Echinopsis for reference. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echinopsis I’ve labeled each description with the Trichocereus species name followed by the Echinopsis species name in parenthesis. No need to read through them now as my next post summarizes the particulars that I’d like to discuss.
Bridgesii (langeniformis)
The plant has a light green to bluish color and usually has four to eight ribs. It can grow 2–5 m tall with stems of up to 15–20 cm in diameter. Spines can range in coloration from honey-coloured to brown, and are located on the nodes in groups of up to four. These spines can grow up to 6–7 cm in length and in fully grown plants are spaced evenly on the ribs, 2.5 to 3 cm apart.
Pachanoi (pachenoi)
Echinopsis pachanoi is native to Ecuador and Peru. Its stems are light to dark green, sometimes glaucous, with a diameter of 6–15 cm (2.4–5.9 in) and usually 6–8 ribs. The whitish areoles may produce up to seven yellow to brown spines, each up to 2 cm (0.8 in) long; the plant is sometimes spineless. The areoles are spaced evenly along the ribs, approximately 2 cm (0.8 in) apart. Echinopsis pachanoi is normally 3–6 m (10–20 ft) tall and has multiple branches, usually extending from the base. The tallest recorded specimen was 12.2 metres (40 ft) tall. White flowers are produced at the end of the stems; they open at night. The flowers are large, around 19–24 cm (7.5–9.4 in) long with a diameter of up to 20 cm (7.9 in). There are black hairs along the length of the tube leading to the flower. Oblong dark green fruits are produced after fertilization, about 3 cm (1.2 in) across and 5–6 cm (2.0–2.4 in) long.
Peruvianus (peruviana)
The plant is bluish-green in color, with frosted stems, and 6-9 broadly rounded ribs; it has large, white flowers. It can grow up to 3–6 m (9.8–19.7 ft) tall, with stems up to 8–18 cm (3.1–7.1 in) in diameter; it is fully erect to begin with, but later possibly arching over, or even becoming prostrate. Groups of 6-8 honey-colored to brown rigid spines, up to 4 cm (1.6 in) in length, with most about 1 cm (0.39 in), are located at the nodes, which are evenly spaced along the ribs, up to approximately 2.5 cm (0.98 in) apart.
Macrogonus (macrogona)
Echinopsis macrogona, syn. Trichocereus macrogonus, is a species of cactus found in Bolivia. It has a shrubby habit, with erect columnar stems around 2–3 m (7–10 ft) tall and 5–9 cm (2.0–3.5 in) in diameter. The stem is bluish green with 6–9 prominent ribs. The gray colored areoles have yellow-brown spines; there are 1–3 longer central spines, up to 5 cm (2.0 in) long, and 6–9 shorter radial spines, up to 2 cm (0.8 in) long. Large white flowers, up to 18 cm (7.1 in) long, are borne at the top of the stems.
-
Features that apply to identifying cuttings of the various species are summarized below with the exception of those that all have in common like honey-coloured to brown spikes and green to bluish (glaucous) color. Also, those that would only apply to mature specimens like flowers and maximum diameter are omitted. If a range of numbers was supplied, that is reflected in the table, but if an up-to number was supplied, only the maximum is listed.
I’d like to replace the question marks so please comment if you can supply the missing information.
Description Bridgesii Pachanoi Peruvianus Macrogonus
Number of spines 4 7 8 12
Length of spines 7cm 2cm 1-4cm 2-5cm
Spacing of areoles 3cm 2cm 2.5cm ?
Color of areoles ? whitish ? gray
Number of Ribs 4-8 6-9 6-9 6-9
-
I think the ID is good on this one, at least the species. I purchased it as Bridgesii var. Psycho0. I suppose I have to take the word of the seller on the variety. Please press the like button if you agree on the species. :)
Description Bridgesii Plant 1
Number of spines 4 4
Length of spines 7cm 4cm
Spacing of areoles 3cm 3.5cm
Color of areoles ? gray
Number of Ribs 4-8 6
-
This one seems to be peruvianus as claimed. Please press like if you agree. :D
Description Peruvianus Plant 2
Number of spines 8 8
Length of spines 1-4cm 3
Spacing of areoles 2.5cm 2.5cm
Color of areoles ? gray
Number of Ribs 6-9 6
-
I would say that the easiest way to be able to accurately identify these species is to look at as many pics as you can find. After a few thousand pics, you'll be able to easily tell the difference:) Counting spines and such is all well and good, but for the most part they are far easier to identify by careful examination of the plant as a whole.
Trout's notes is a fantastic resource:
http://www.exoticplantbooks.com/detail/?product_id=128
I highly recommend getting a copy if you don't already have one.
-
I would say that the easiest way to be able to accurately identify these species is to look at as many pics as you can find. After a few thousand pics, you'll be able to easily tell the difference:) Counting spines and such is all well and good, but for the most part they are far easier to identify by careful examination of the plant as a whole.
Trout's notes is a fantastic resource:
http://www.amazon.com/Trouts-Notes-Related-Trichocereus-Species/
I highly recommend getting a copy if you don't already have one.
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll get a copy. Don't mean to be a bore with this but still, asking a few questions of you guys is a lot faster than noticing the similarities of a few thousand pics, right? :)
Besides, really only want 1 true specimen of each to get started and would rather not make the same mistake I made starting with Psychotria Viridis. Meaning I accepted the word of the seller and for 2 years grew Alba thinking it was Viridis. :P So please humor me for a bit longer. ;)
-
I disagree with the ID of the seller on this one. It is supposed to be a short-spined peruvianus but I'm thinking pachanoi. Anyone agree with me?
Description Pachanoi Peruvianus plant 3
Number of spines 7 8 5
Length of spines 2cm 1-4cm 2cm
Spacing of areoles 2cm 2.5cm 2cm
Color of areoles whitish ? whitish
Number of Ribs 6-9 6-9 7
-
Ok, one more and this boring nonsense will be finished. :D
I don't understand why this is called peruvianus when it appears to be macrogonus -- at least based on spine count and length of longest spines. Actually, I am pretty dense sometimes because I didn't even notice that this one looks very different from the picture on the vendors website until today. I got the cutting about 2 months ago. If anyone thinks that this is peruvianus despite having spine characteristics of macrogonus , have pity on me and please let me know why. :-\
Description Peruvianus Macrogonus Plant 4
Number of spines 8 12 12
Length of spines 1-4cm 2-5cm 5cm
Spacing of areoles 2.5cm ? 2cm
Color of areoles ? gray light brown
Number of Ribs 6-9 6-9 8
-
You may be right on that last one. To me the shape of the top of the column (more pointed compared to the previous pic) says macrogonus as does the color and spination.
I would agree with the vendor on the second to last pic. The blue color and broad rounded ribs appear more peruvianus than Pachanoi. In general, a Pachanoi has sharper less rounded ribs and a more green color. This is one of those cases where a simple key may fail to give a proper ID.
Having said that, these plants inter-breed and have been doing so for a long time. We like to put them in neat little boxes, but in reality there is a spectrum across the board. In many cases, a plant can fall somewhere in between.
-
Besides, really only want 1 true specimen of each to get started and would rather not make the same mistake I made starting with Psychotria Viridis. Meaning I accepted the word of the seller and for 2 years grew Alba thinking it was Viridis. :P )
The situation with trichs is not so black and white as it is with P. viridis and alba. With only a few exceptions I can think of, if you know you have a trich it will be biochemically interesting whether or not the species/variety is precisely pinned down. It's just a matter of how interesting. The exceptions are cuzcoensis which can be confused with peruvianus/macrogonus and is typically regarded as being completely uninteresting and PC pach which can be highly variable.
More experience trich folks might have more to add here.
-
Welcome to the cactus club :D
Trichocereus is a very messed up collection of plants especially in recent years due to hybrids and in the past with KK and mislabeled plants.
The first peruvianus you posted is actually cuzcoensis. The way you can more tell is that the central spine becomes white with age and looking at the thickness of the spine you will notice that it thins to a point. Peruvianus do not start thick and thin to a point but stays fairly equal thickness throughout (like a toothpick) and the spine tends to stay brown rather than get white with age.
I personally join Pachanoi and Peruvianus together but even if kept separate; Macrogonus is a subspecies of Peruvianus similar to Cuzcoensis also being a subspecies of Peruvianus.
Like Bach mentioned it is not exactly easy to get 'pure' clones of these however there are many cacti that exhibit the classic traits of each species. Psycho is a pretty 'classic' looking bridgesii. The macrogonus you show is a pretty classic 'peruvianus' to me but can also fall into the macrogonus I guess.
To add to your confusion the spine length of many cacti can change based on growth conditions like there are 'long spined' pachanoi when grown in full sun and also age is a factor. The 'short spine' peruvianus is most likely a 'true' pachanoi' and that name was given by MSSmith in the past and he has since retracted it I believe. It is possible to have a short spined peruvianus plant due to genetic variations from seeds like short spines bridgesii are in existence.
When looking for 'true' pachanoi there are some named clones available (not so much in the states other than Juul's Giant) but every so often one is on eBay. Pay close attention to the ribs which will be much rounder and the new growth will not have that extended areoles like with PC clones. And areoles color I think is varied as I have Pachanoi with gray/brownish colored areoles. Careful that most pachanoi on eBay are PC.
Now in current years there have been many hybrids with PC pachanoi and Cuzcoensis which can lead to active 'Cuzcoensis' and powerful 'pc pachanoi' if the labels are lost.
You could buy all the cacti you have shown and you will have 'classic' example of each and you should probably get a terscheckii for good measure. When buying 'peruvianus' be careful as many sellers don't know what they have or mislabel to get more money. Also try to buy more mature cuttings as seedlings and young cuttings can easily trick many people.
-
We like to put them in neat little boxes, but in reality there is a spectrum across the board. In many cases, a plant can fall somewhere in between.
Good points there Psylocke! However, the fact that botanical names are being provided to cacti leads me to want to understand why. ???
BTW, I downloaded the book here: http://troutsnotes.com
Sent them a donation too although it isn't required.
Epic piece of work! :)
-
The situation with trichs is not so black and white as it is with P. viridis and alba. With only a few exceptions I can think of, if you know you have a trich it will be biochemically interesting whether or not the species/variety is precisely pinned down. It's just a matter of how interesting. The exceptions are cuzcoensis which can be confused with peruvianus/macrogonus and is typically regarded as being completely uninteresting and PC pach which can be highly variable.
I completely agree with you, well as I'm just now discovering. :-[ I'm just trying to learn something and have a little fun while trying to sort it all out. :D
-
I would say that the easiest way to be able to accurately identify these species is to look at as many pics as you can find. After a few thousand pics, you'll be able to easily tell the difference:) Counting spines and such is all well and good, but for the most part they are far easier to identify by careful examination of the plant as a whole.
Trout's notes is a fantastic resource:
http://www.exoticplantbooks.com/detail/?product_id=128
I highly recommend getting a copy if you don't already have one.
Reading Trout's Notes on San Pedro right now. About 1/3 through, I've seen about a thousand pictures so far and am still confused. ;)
Seriously, I'm really enjoying it and thanks for the reco and thanks to mj for directing me to the PDF link.
Love this from page 7:
Important comments concerning the images we included
The subgenus Trichocereus (and for that matter Echinopsis itself) is presently hopelessly muddled. This situation is the result of a complex combination of, at least, several factors.
The first being the disturbing fact that shoddy to inadequate descriptions exist for many, if not most, of the species considered to comprise the subgenus. This is further complicated by there being no meaningful systematic overview or monograph. The creation of such is almost precluded by the existence of a bewildering wealth of hybrids or intermediates not just in horticulture but also as what appears to be hybrid swarming and/or grex in the wild.
There are layers of additional introductions of confusion including correctly labeled, mislabeled and unlabeled plants, entering horticulture through an indeterminate number of university-funded cactus collection expeditions and other sources for material destined to populate botanical gardens, as well as from commercial outlets and a myriad of private Trichocereus collectors whose activities span more than half a century. Many of these have failed to retain proper identification and/or labeling.
-
The first peruvianus you posted is actually cuzcoensis. The way you can more tell is that the central spine becomes white with age
In reality, eventually older spines from most all trichs turn white as they age, most especially if grown in full sun, including bridgesii & peruvianus.
Off hand I would say dont think for a moment that reading books and studying pictures will give you the keys & knowledge you need to identify trichs, except perhaps with most bridgesii. With trichs theres far too many variables that come into play, and most especially if when grown in the ground.
Short spine, long spine, no spine, fade into meaningless gibberish when a plant proves itself outside the bell curve for specific characteristics. For instance 'only pachanoi have white hairs on the floral tube', except in the case of certain bridgesii.....or 'cuzcoenisis central spines turn white with age'.....something commonly seen on all old, in ground trichs grown in full sun.
Here's two slightly different views of the same garden. Four plants have been marked with color bars for orientation & identification purposes....can you name all the trich plants shown? ;)
-
Here's two slightly different views of the same garden. Four plants have been marked with color bars for orientation & identification purposes....can you name all the trich plants shown? ;)
Haha, Trout warns against this and seems happy to leave the waters muddy as demonstrated in the following quote also from page 7 of Notes on San Pedro:
"We would also suggest that should our readers encounter anyone who considers themselves an expert on this genus, or anyone who insists that they know what differentiates, say, a short-spined peruvianus from a long-spined pachanoi, the best course of action is probably to nod one’s head, indicating a lack of desire to argue, & leave them to their beliefs."
Now I know why everyone was nodding their heads at my efforts to do so. :D
This subject is difficult to talk about but it is fun to try to talk about it. :)
-
Another source of info.
http://www.sacredcactus.com/index.htm
-
I personally join Pachanoi and Peruvianus together but even if kept separate; Macrogonus is a subspecies of Peruvianus similar to Cuzcoensis also being a subspecies of Peruvianus.
Lots of good points in your post but this one I've really been thinking about. In a way, perhaps none of these should be considered a separate species but perhaps individual sub-species. What really got me thinking about this was when I posted my Narcissus Tazetta this morning: http://sharetheseeds.me/forum/index.php?topic=3184.msg25434#msg25434 I knew it was a Tazetta but every time I've ever referenced this bulb before today, I've called it Narcissus/Italicus thinking it was genus/species. However, when I checked to be sure before posting I found my error. It is Narcissus tazetta var. italicus
Have you heard of anyone else bring this issue up before?
-
Well misplant I agree to most of what you mention however there is a basic ID key to atleast narrow the cactus to a few possible candidates. Different growing conditions; pot vs land, full sun vs shade, and possibly feeding conditions or some other factors will play into characteristics as well as genetics. I guess I could be wrong considering some Peruvianus localities look on par with cuzco. You do have lots of experience and quite the collection and I am only starting really so :-X Also some of your bridgesii (hybrids) planted in the ground have impressive diameters and I would likely misID some as Pachanoi/Peruvianus.
I don't claim to be a pro ID'er and also prefer to just group plants rather than try to find an 'exact' ID. BTW I'd call those all pachanoi/peruvianus as far as I can tell from afar. The Yellow tag is the more common pachanoi available here in the states and the others probably more accepted as peruvianus. How much time elapsed between the two photos? 2 years or less?
plantlight I think this issue comes up once in a while do to the way people label or talk about certain plants like T.Huarazensis. It is a Pachanoi from around Huara but rather than labeling it T. Pachanoi var(locality?) Huarazensis they did similar to you. Same goes with a few other plants from my understanding like T. puquiensis,
T. ayacucho, and T. puquio. Some consider them pachanoi others peruvianus I just call them pachanoi as I see them as the same.
You should consider just collecting cuttings from 'trusted' sources like misplant and other established members in the community. Buying from eBay or other questionable sources may lead to issues in the future like MANY people have grown peruvianus from a source (BBB?)and it was cuzco and inactive. Some people just keep what the seller had and kept record of the seller so like Peruvianus (WSS) or w.e.
I personally like the way cuzco look and tend to use it as a grafting stock... If I had the space and land I would have a few growing as they are quite impressive and robust growers.
-
I personally join Pachanoi and Peruvianus together but even if kept separate; Macrogonus is a subspecies of Peruvianus similar to Cuzcoensis also being a subspecies of Peruvianus.
Botanical nomenclature has chronological priority.
T. cuzcoensis was first described in 1920, pachanoi also in 1920, peruvianus in 1920 as well, macrogonus... in 1909 :o
Collapse them into one species and they would all be subtypes of T. macrogonus
-
The Yellow tag is the more common pachanoi available here in the states and the others probably more accepted as peruvianus
modern- here's a recent pic of the base of 'yellow' with a new pup. When I acquired it as a small pup, I was told it was SS03. Today it more closely resembles 2 other TPM plants in my garden, although I understand SS03 is a peruvianus also....TPM's tend to remain a deep dark green color in all lighting/growing conditions & some being more monstrous than others.
As for cuzcoensis, it's interesting that Trout has it included in his listing of cactus containing certain alkaloids. (SC3_A2.pdf)
Years ago i acquired a certain specimen of cuzcoensis from Brujo de la Colonia from the long defunct Edot forum, who regarded it as his favorite teacher plant, although he referred to it as a peruvianus. Experience has illuminated that some specimens of cuzcoensis are and some are not.
-
I have interacted with a T cuzcoensis in a way that was very interesting, I think there could be more biochemical studies around that one...