The five cactus pics in this gallery. http://www.spiritplants.org/phpbb/galle ... hp?album=4 (http://www.spiritplants.org/phpbb/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=4)
Jiku,if he saw this,would have a field day with his favorite term....Etoliation.
I can only go on what I have seen,or thought .. but that plant is so wasted,I may fool myself in calling it a Peruvian...
the spines raise a question. It does however,have the wildness of a SS03.
There should/could be other answers. I can only play a guessing game with what I got.
If you are asking about the other,don`t know. Suspect two out three on the chair are Trichs. The other two are of a short spined variety
...for the edit,the more I look,the more they(short spined) do seem like 'Pedro',the pup...I wonder if it would matter to see the cacti slice, top or bottom,if that would give a clue of internal structure,for determination.
Yeah, those two bigger ones, some wierd guy who I sure don't know, dropped them off at this local botanical store where I had been keaping/selling some trich's in the front window...... was just curious if anybody would spot them. But anyrate, the ones this guy brought in, they were both in pots tiny pots in plant soil and very diseased as you can partially see in the before pics. And the fat one was just a huge tip that was stuck head first in. But I had to cut the tip off it, it was just mush from either yellow rot or freezing.
Apparenty the guy who dropped em off had it in his head that I might be able to rescue them or something. I don't think theirs much hope though, they are both pretty shot. Nor did I get the impression from the shop owner that the guy had any idea what they were. Strange.
And the three small ones on the chair, the one on the right was passed at a home depot as a trichocerius grandiflorus hybrid and the one in back off as a cerius peruvianus monstrosa.
hi fu! I remembered that one pic from somewhere else you posted it for some reason. Must be my jealousy of never having sampled fresh wild buttons!
Man, I've been away too long. Hi everyone!
j :P
Hey Jiku! Good to see you around man.
Yeah, thats fu alwright............ thats just a general gallery though, I'm the artist formerly known as Andy the Great Something.
Ahh, that explains it. I thought Avery was Andy but that dude in the photo looked a lot different than the Andy I've seen picks of, I think... my memory of the members photos gallery is a little hazy. Cept for the hat photo of course. :)
Weren't you sitting on a rock or mountain climbing or something?
Yeah, all of that actually!
I just uploaded the cross cut of that spiney one up. It just looks like a classic trich....... except for the spine formations as CJ pointed out. So, I still don't know.
LOL! Well now I know why the cacti are etoliated... ;)
j :oops:
There you are!! :evil: I was waiting that :x Etoliation! Bah!!
Actually You use that term because it is a concern of yours,jus funny that Iv`e heared it so much from your corner,it sounds like an intestinal disorder or something... :)
Of course,I `ve read your approach to avoid it.. Your climate may change for you in the future,from what I was seeing ,in another thread. If so,Mr. Smiths winter routine may become the way to go then,dark and cold(above freezing,tho`.).
My apologies,this thread is about another topic. AVery, when I mentioned the internal structere,I was thinking how Mr. Smith differenciattes between Pachnoi,and short spined Peruvian,though I have no practical experience,meself. So the pictures with the hand and declared Pedro...that is what I was thinking of.
The first photo and the cross section are clearly T. peruvianus of the KK242 sort. The other one (of which there are 2 photos) of which there is some question about it being a short Spined T. peruvianus is a T. pachanoi. I think it might be upside down though. The slope of the areole is angled from top inside to bottom outside. If you hold the plant upwards like in the photo the areoles on the right side of the plant should be on an angle like this: [ ]. Got it?
I see in one of the photos that the plant is "dirty" (this is the one with the thin clipping next to it). In the second one it is cleaned up. The stuff that came off appears to have been a very severe case of "scale." It does come off with a little scrubbing (as you have found out), but you should keep any plant with this bug separated from the others until you can be assured that they don't return.
The little collection appears to be, from left to right, a Tricho, possibly a young T. peruvianus or a small tip clipping, a monstrose Cereus sp., and then T. huascha (T. grandiflorus, T. lobivioides).
And just to let everyone know, as this is one of the most misspelled plant terms around, it is "etiolation," not "etoliation." The term has less to do with the diameter of the plant, but rather has to do with the blanched color it takes on when being unable to produce adequate chlorophyll due to improper light. The diameter is due to low light as well, but a plant can still have proper color while not reach maximum diameter. Under such circumstance it shouldn't really be called etiolation.
My goal has always been to be able to consistently maintain the maximum diameter my outdoor lighting helps my plants achieve. Light dictates diameter, heat dictates growth. If the heat required for growth stops then the light doesn’t matter at all and they can be in bright light as long as the solar heat being absorbed by the plant doesn’t warm it up enough to grow. If you loose the proper light to maintain the diameter, but keep the heat that spurns growth then the plant will continue to grow and get thin with the possibility of etiolation.
I consider myself fortunate to have an attached and unheated garage so that in winter my plants don’t have to come indoors. If they were to be brought indoors they would get the minimal amount of heat to get slight growth (which would be thinned), and this new growth would be blanched from etiolation.
~Michael~
Hey, thanks for the replies!........ yeah that long spined one sure looks like a trich to me too. It's funny though, I tried a little taste test on some of the flesh of the pedro and the long spined number (just a little nibble) and they tasted completely different. Would have thought that in theory if they were both trichs had similiar alkaloid makeup, they would have tasted similiar, but the longspined one was almost tasteless........ like a cucumber, while the pedro was bitter.
Well it turns out that the KK242 has have quite variable results in its alkaloid concentrations (probably due to other species being called KK242, or more likely in my estimation the KK242 not being a T. peruvianus at all, something I have been increasingly concerned about), but generally never has been considered high. This is both from quantitative chemical examinations and from anecdotal reports of psychonauts. I will make more comments on the species issue later after I complete my research (which I must admit is coming along slowly). There is a Peruvian source for T. peruvianus that has become popular in the last couple years who is selling a plant from the area the KK242 is "claimed" to originate, but the plant is not particularly similar to the KK242 in form and is not variable at all in alkaloid concentration, but rather quite consitently has high concentrations.
~Michael~