Eriosyce ID plz

[toson]

No more information about it ,only i know it bloomed white in 2015.

IMG_8174.JPG (134.7 KiB) Viewed 899 times

IMG_8189.JPG (97.49 KiB) Viewed 899 times

IMG_8190.JPG (95.71 KiB) Viewed 899 times

[stefan m.]

My best guess, its either rare, or a weird cross between any two of Eriosyce curvispina var. robusta,Eriosyce echinus,Eriosyce senilis subsp. coimasensis ,Eriosyce (Neochilenia) cachytayensis ?, Eriosyce kunzei .
Rare means E. taltalensis v. pygmaea - similar to yours on this forum http://cactiguide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15705

[C And D]

My guess would be Eriosyce crispa var. huascensis
http://www.cactiguide.com/cactus/?genus ... ies=crispa

And that flower is more of a mixed pink with white

[stefan m.]

Except this thing seems to have some powerful spines. Youd think if they stick out itd make it easy to ID but nope. its body is like an occulta, but spines are like aurata or echinus .
Another(and best canditate) Eriosyce curvispina kesselringianus

[toson]

yeah it's qutie weird and a little expensive , guess Neochilenia cachytayensis? i'll offer some pics closer later.

[toson]

My best guess, its either rare, or a weird cross between any two of Eriosyce curvispina var. robusta,Eriosyce echinus,Eriosyce senilis subsp. coimasensis ,Eriosyce (Neochilenia) cachytayensis ?, Eriosyce kunzei .
Rare means E. taltalensis v. pygmaea - similar to yours on this forum http://cactiguide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15705

i've compare it with E. taltalensis v. pygmaea, they are similar at a first look both purple-brown body with central long spine.But pygmaea has more than one central spines and the flower with different color.

[DaveW]

Fred Kattermann submerged a lot of Ritter varieties with white flowers under E. taltalensis, but the original E. taltalensis sensu Hutchison has purple/pink flowers.

Ritter published a plant as Pyrrhocactus rupicolus (Ritter used Pyrrhocactus for what Kattermann would call Eriosyce and Backeberg Horridicactus/Neochilenia). Giving it an extremely long habitat range from "hills and rocks between Alorro southwest of Caldera and north of Paposo". He later realised that Hutchison had already published the northern part of the range as taltalensis, which took priority, therefore divided off the southern end and called it P. transiens. You will often find plants still being grown as rupicolus which are either taltalensis or transiens. Karel Knize also put this plant out as E. violaciflora nom. nud.

Roger Ferryman picture of RMF 163, E. taltalensis sensu Hutchison from type locality Taltal, Sierra Esmeralda.

taltalensis2-RMF-163.jpg (87.85 KiB) Viewed 828 times

RMF 134 E. transiens. North of Caldera.

transiens2-RMF-134.jpg (85.51 KiB) Viewed 828 times

Spination of all these Eriosyce can be quite variable in habitat, as sometimes can flower colour, with stronger and weaker spined plants growing within a few feet of each other. For an idea of variability see my travelogue for E. crispa from stiff to hair like spines.

http://forum.bcss.org.uk/viewtopic.php? ... 1&start=30

http://forum.bcss.org.uk/viewtopic.php? ... &start=100

[toson]

Fred Kattermann submerged a lot of Ritter varieties with white flowers under E. taltalensis, but the original E. taltalensis sensu Hutchison has purple/pink flowers.

Ritter published a plant as Pyrrhocactus rupicolus (Ritter used Pyrrhocactus for what Kattermann would call Eriosyce and Backeberg Horridicactus/Neochilenia). Giving it an extremely long habitat range from "hills and rocks between Alorro southwest of Caldera and north of Paposo". He later realised that Hutchison had already published the northern part of the range as taltalensis, which took priority, therefore divided off the southern end and called it P. transiens. You will often find plants still being grown as rupicolus which are either taltalensis or transiens. Karel Knize also put this plant out as E. violaciflora nom. nud.

Roger Ferryman picture of RMF 163, E. taltalensis sensu Hutchison from type locality Taltal, Sierra Esmeralda.

taltalensis2-RMF-163.jpg

RMF 134 E. transiens. North of Caldera.

transiens2-RMF-134.jpg

Spination of all these Eriosyce can be quite variable in habitat, as sometimes can flower colour, with stronger and weaker spined plants growing within a few feet of each other. For an idea of variability see my travelogue for E. crispa from stiff to hair like spines.

http://forum.bcss.org.uk/viewtopic.php? ... 1&start=30

http://forum.bcss.org.uk/viewtopic.php? ... &start=100

thanks, in New Cactus Lexicon this one is under E. taltalensis?

[Grimm]

I looked at this last night and my opinion was also that it is probably E.taltalensis.

[7george]

Eriosyce heinrichiana & Eriosyce simulans are very spiny and early blooming as well.

[DaveW]

Yes Toson, the New Cactus Lexicon's lumping classification largely followed Fred Kattermann with a few changes made by Roger Ferryman, rather than using Ritter's original concept of species. You will note a lot of the illustrations used in the NCL are Rogers (RMF are his collection numbers).

Fred in his book "Eriosyce, The Genus Revised and Amplified" reduces Ritter's species as follows:-

22.1a. Eriosyce taltalensis (these pink flowered)
Syn. P rupicola
P. tenuis

22.1b Eriosyce taltalensis v. pygmaea (these mainly white or slightly yellowish flowered, though often some red on outer petals.
Syn. P. calderanus
P. gracilis
P. scoparius
P. intermedius
P. pulchellus
P. transiens (which is strange as it is obviously pink flowered and more closely related to taltalensis sensu stricto).

22.2. Eriosyce taltalensis subsp. paucicostata (usually whitish, though some flowers have more reddish outer petals
syn. P. neohankeanus

22.3a. Eriosyce taltalensis subsp. echinus (usually similar flowered to paucicostata)
Syn. P. glaucescens

22.3b. Eriosyce taltalensis v. floccosa (again flowers as paucicostata)

22.4. taltalensis subsp. pilispina (Roger and Fred disagree on what was Ritter's pilispina, Roger considering Fred's concept is Ritter's pulchellus).

Apart from Fred's Eriosyce taltalensis which are pink flowered as in Hutchison's original, most of the other Ritter species he reduces to varieties or forms of taltalensis are usually white petaled internally with different degrees of reddish outer petals.

What is curious about the above list is that floccosa, which is simply a "hairy paucicostata", is kept separate and also glaucescens, which are probably more closely related to paucicostata than neohankeana.

Roger Ferryman is supposed to be writing a book on the group, which may differ in some respects to both Fred's and the NCL classification. Fred Kattermann is currently revising his classification as a part series in the American Journal based on some new DNA Sequencing work that is being done.

http://www.bioone.org/doi/10.2985/015.089.0507

[toson]

Yes Toson, the New Cactus Lexicon's lumping classification largely followed Fred Kattermann with a few changes made by Roger Ferryman, rather than using Ritter's original concept of species. You will note a lot of the illustrations used in the NCL are Rogers (RMF are his collection numbers).

Fred in his book "Eriosyce, The Genus Revised and Amplified" reduces Ritter's species as follows:-

22.1a. Eriosyce taltalensis (these pink flowered)
Syn. P rupicola
P. tenuis

22.1b Eriosyce taltalensis v. pygmaea (these mainly white or slightly yellowish flowered, though often some red on outer petals.
Syn. P. calderanus
P. gracilis
P. scoparius
P. intermedius
P. pulchellus
P. transiens (which is strange as it is obviously pink flowered and more closely related to taltalensis sensu stricto).

22.2. Eriosyce taltalensis subsp. paucicostata (usually whitish, though some flowers have more reddish outer petals
syn. P. neohankeanus

22.3a. Eriosyce taltalensis subsp. echinus (usually similar flowered to paucicostata)
Syn. P. glaucescens

22.3b. Eriosyce taltalensis v. floccosa (again flowers as paucicostata)

22.4. taltalensis subsp. pilispina (Roger and Fred disagree on what was Ritter's pilispina, Roger considering Fred's concept is Ritter's pulchellus).

Apart from Fred's Eriosyce taltalensis which are pink flowered as in Hutchison's original, most of the other Ritter species he reduces to varieties or forms of taltalensis are usually white petaled internally with different degrees of reddish outer petals.

What is curious about the above list is that floccosa, which is simply a "hairy paucicostata", is kept separate and also glaucescens, which are probably more closely related to paucicostata than neohankeana.

Roger Ferryman is supposed to be writing a book on the group, which may differ in some respects to both Fred's and the NCL classification. Fred Kattermann is currently revising his classification as a part series in the American Journal based on some new DNA Sequencing work that is being done.

http://www.bioone.org/doi/10.2985/015.089.0507

thanks a lot, in my opinion, the NCL makes paucicostata differ from taltalensis, I have some erioyces including: neohankeana |neohankeana f.black |neohankeana v. flaviflora (WK 730) and hankeana...i've no idea they are paucicostata or taltalensis coz' they looks so different from each other