Can someone please clarify for me the difference between Cleistocactus colademononis and Hildewintera colademononis? Are they the same plant and if so which is the correct name? I am trying to sort it myself as I await for a reply but am not too optimistic at the moment so would greatly appreciate clarification from anyone who has knowledge of this. Thank you
I recommend the IPNI website for investigating things like this. Entering Cactaceae into the 'family' and colad* into either 'species' or 'infraspecific' returns this and this. You can then check to see if any or all of these names comes from the same basionym.
David Hunt "corrected" colademonensis to colademono on transfer to Cleistocactus (now Cleistocactus colademono). Some claim it is a natural hybrid between a Cleistocactus and Hildewinteria aureispinus, (also changed to Cleistocactus winteri on transfer to Cleistocactus), but whether DNA studies have been done to prove this I do not know.
Specific names like Hildewinteria aureispinus often have to be changed when they are moved to another genus if there is already an aureispinus in that genus when that takes priority. Other instances are Chamaecereus silvestrii changed to Echinopsis chamaecereus as there already was an Echinopsis silvestrii and Notocactus uebelmannianus becoming Parodia werneri since Parodia already had a species called uebelmannianus. If they are transferred out of that genus again though the original specific name is restored, always assuming it does not exist in the new genus they are moved to.
The correct name depends on whose classification you accept Susi, you are entitled to use any you chose provided the name was validly published. New classifications are not mandatory since there is no such thing as a "correct classification".
DaveW wrote:David Hunt "corrected" colademonensis to colademono on transfer to Cleistocactus (now Cleistocactus colademono).
Be careful! colademonensis isn't right (a slip of the finger?) and, at species level, neither is colademono. It's colademononis at species level or colademono at subspecies level. Hunt chose a different name, rather than made a correction, as he was entitled to do when changing it's status from species to another rank.
Yes my typing Phil, if the spell checker does not recognise the word it does not pick it up, neither does my eyesight these days I am afraid!
Yes I wish the "Rules" would put a stop the unnecessary changing of names when moving plants to another rank. I think it is simply botanists trying to enhance their CV's by doing something completely pointless and unnecessary to draw attention to themselves. I can understand if there was a conflict of names at that rank, but not otherwise. The practice is completely pointless anyway and the "Rules" are there to supposedly to stop unnecessary name changes, so it's time that "loophole" was blocked up.
Ok The connection seems to be holding at the moment. It plays up for two or three nights then goes perfect again. Sometimes it happens every week like that thcen I get a long period with no problems at all. Anyway I just wanted to say thank you to all of you for comments, I found them very useful. I did actually find a site that explained about the double ID etc. but your comments made it all much clearer. I needed to know because I was looking for a more mature plant than the one that I have recently purchased and also to check out on the net all the details of it for my ref. sheet. Thank you again for sharing your knowledge and expertise, much appreciated.
Are they the same plant and if so which is the correct name? I am trying to sort it myself as I await for a reply but am not too optimistic at the moment so would greatly appreciate clarification from anyone who has knowledge of this. Thank you 
