Peterb's new, revised 2012

[peterb]

I bet rufida and basilaris are only superficially similar and aren't closely related. But I'll be damned if I can explain the difference. Photos could help, or the descriptions at the Flora of North America on the web. I know the two when I see them, but that's not helpful is it? Post a pic!

peterb

[hoteidoc]

Peterb - Posted over in ID section. Thanks
Peter

[Peterthecactusguy]

BTW from what I saw I wanna say his is O. rufida..

Love that O. basilaris flower. It's interesting.

I sorta lean towards that too. I dont think O. rufida and O. basilaris have anything in common. Dean might be able to tell us that, but I doubt they are closely related.

BTW those Echinocereus are cool. like your E. engelmannii too. It's got cool spines on it for sure

[peterb]

Echinocereus rigidisimus rubispinus flowering yesterday, very dramatic.

peterb

[hoteidoc]

rubrispinus - Ah, my 1st blossom ever, last summer. Sort of like 1st good kiss ! It's just putting out tiny blossom nub now! Thanks, Peter!

[peterb]

Snobby Snobberton, the cactus name police officer reminds you: it is not rubrispinus, but rubispinus. Also a charming reminder that perhaps 80% of the plants sold as rubispinus are really just pink/red versions of rigidissimus from the Sonoran. True rubispinus is a Chihuahuan Desert endemic from a very limited distribution and is much less frequently encountered in cultivation than thought.

End of charming snobitude.

peterb

[gemhunter178]

Here we see a very colorful flower and a very colorful plant! I also see a pollinator in the first picture!

[hoteidoc]

Snobs are cool! Some of my best friends are snobs , esp. when I know they know a thing or 2 about cacti! But I know my Latin & Cactapedia backs me - rubrispinus: red spines! But just don't call me late for dinner!
Peter

[peterb]

a wise person once said, not all correct botanical names are correct Latin. the epithet is indeed "rubispinus," no r. I'm not sure if it really is incorrect or not, as my last year of Latin was 1980. Anyway, it reminds me of Echinocereus chisoensis, which technically ought to be chisosensis, but isn't.

peterb

[hoteidoc]

Which then brings us to: Fact is stranger than Fiction! Or I could say -- Just checkin' to see if Snob Patrol was on-duty! Thanks, Peter

[Peterthecactusguy]

hopefully mine will have a flower on it soon. It's had the dang buds for a month or so
PeterB, you are right that flower is BRILLIANT! I think I made a good choice

[peterb]

Neoevansia viperina flowers, skipped last year, flowered two years ago for the first time, 17 years after seed sowing.

peterb

[hegar]

That's a nice plant, Peter. You certainly had to have a lot of patience - 17 years - to finally see this cactus in bloom. Is this your oldest plant?
Also, image two shows what looks like perhaps a Peniocereus greggii. Do you have flowering size plants of these?
If I am really lucky, one of my plants may actually produce a blossom or two later this year. However, I do not see any definite sign of flower buds.

Harald

[Peterthecactusguy]

I think that Neoevansia viperina is a Peniocereus viperina?

[tumamoc]

Sweet! Day-blooming cereus .