southern Utah

Share info and Pictures about gardens, parks, nurseries, and other locations with cacti.
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: southern Utah

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

while I agree that might be the case, since the state owns the cacti, they let them get mowed over at high rates. Where I lived at they were just going to let them come through without doing anything for anybody. All the cacti would have been destroyed. Who knows how many were. North of here they took out saguaros, Opuntia, Echinocereus, Ferocactus, Cylindropuntia... etc..
I just dislike how the state lets this stuff happen in the means of profit. I would much rather have research done. I know how Opuntia are, they don't mind if you take a pad or even two off a plant. I suspect that it makes them healthier to be pruned occasionally. With my own plants, If I didnt get them at a nursery I could probably get in trouble for doing anything with them, however I doubt that the state would really care much. My point is that the state leads to more deaths then researchers do.. :)
BTW lastly I would like to mention that as my own personally morals suggest, I don't take anything out of the National Monument or State parks.. I will however pick up pads that are chopped down dumpped or found in the middle of the road..etc.. I think giving them a chance to grow is ok.. no matter what the state says.. cause technically I shouldn't transport them .. from where they are dumped etc...without a salvage permit. Excuse my nasty mood, I have a migraine tonight.. :)
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
User avatar
Glochid Fingers
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:46 am
Location: Logandale, Nevada

Re: southern Utah

Post by Glochid Fingers »

Nice pictures peterb!! =D> I love Zion. Try the hidden canyon trail. Its hard, but very fun. And once you get up in the canyon there is ferns and mosses growing on either side of you. Its like the weeping rock hike only better :D
I happened to pick up a decent book about cacti from one of the gift shops. 70 common cacti of the southwest.
You can find it on this page. http://www.cactiguide.com/ref/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
vlani
Posts: 2185
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:40 pm
Location: Mountain View CA

Re: southern Utah

Post by vlani »

Speaking of Echinocereus mojavensis - my impression that all Zion plants at lower altitude are coccineus - like the one on peter's first pic. There are some fairly large multiheaded mounds there. Zion coccineus form is very spiny, similar to that E. toroweapensis form.

Mojavensis or mojavensis-like plants occur on higher elevation, like Angel's Landing. There are couple plants ath the trail end that look different than the ones down low. I haven't seen them in flower - that would be end of May time I'm guessing.
A. Dean Stock
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:41 am
Location: 40 south 7440 east Kanab, Utah (Johnson Canyon)

Re: southern Utah

Post by A. Dean Stock »

I lived in Zion for two summers and have hiked most of the trails many times but have never caught the higher altitude forms in flower for comparisons. No chromosome counts are available for most of th Zion plants but counts have been made on plants just south of Zion. The range of E. coccineus in Utah is very narrow and is from Zion south. Populations of E. mohavensis surround those of E. coccineus so it is entirely possible that the two could occur together in Zion. There is a more or less continuous chain of populations of E. coccineus from Zion south to Toroweap and the flowers of many of the known tetraploid plants near Zion and Rockvile are very much like those at Toroweap. All are presenlty considered to be subsp. coccineus in the new Intermountain Flora volume two part A. Most of the cactus people in Utah however are not entirely convinced that the taxa canyonensis and toroweapensis should be placed in synonomy under subsp. coccineus . Much more work must be done on these populations to resolve the issue.
Dean
Albert Dean Stock,Ph.D.
peterb
Posts: 9516
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:19 am
Location: Chandler, Arizona, USA

Re: southern Utah

Post by peterb »

Interesting info as always Dean. In Arizona, Marc Baker did extensive multivariate analysis of the so-called coccineus forms and ended up with evidence supporting the separation of arizonicus, arizonicus nigrihorridispinus, santaritensis and yavapaiensis. It seems the closer these "claret cups" are inspected, the more varied they are. At a glance, the multi-ribbed, mound or clump forming claret cups all seem quite similar. I am growing a "toroweapensis" from Mesa Garden seed that looks interesting indeed, even in the seedling stage.

peterb
Zone 9
A. Dean Stock
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:41 am
Location: 40 south 7440 east Kanab, Utah (Johnson Canyon)

Re: southern Utah

Post by A. Dean Stock »

Peter,
I have seen over the years that any time a group of organisims of any kind is studied in great detail the relationshipls of various populations become more clear and often recognized as named taxa. On the other hand the people that do sweeping large studies ( I call them Coffee Table Book studies) usually end up placing many named taxa in synonomy. Of course, some of this is due to a better understanding that some names are based on the same population but often it just means that the authors of the study simply had no data. In the recent Intermountain Flora, O.basilaris var. heilii is placed in synonomy under var. longiareolata which it does not resemble. I advised against that decision and so did Dorte Woodruff but to no avail. When I asked on what grounds the decision was made, I was informed that neither author involved had ever seen a living plant or preserved specimen of var. heilii. Is that science?? I think not but it happens in general studies done by people who have never had "boots on the ground". (End of sermon).
I'm hoping that Marc Baker will take a closer look at the Toroweap/Utah populations of E. coccineus as well as the possible diploid population of E. engelmannii in southern Utah. In the meantime we can all enjoy the rich colors of the Zion/Torroweap plants. I'll try to get better photos in the spring and post some of them.
Dean
Albert Dean Stock,Ph.D.
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: southern Utah

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

wait, what Dean?

I would think that people that are studying cacti aren't just in labs looking at DNA sequences. I mean it makes no sense even if part of the DNA is the same to look at the plants. I mean the way I tell the ones around me is by looking at the flowers more than the forms. As you know O. engelmannii and O. phaeacantha are in close proximity AND so therefore around here we have lots of hybrids between the two.. I am pretty sure that if I labled one one or the other the DNA would match. But then again, I dunno, DNA is sort of a new thing, I know what it is, and all, but still I dont know tons about it.. lol if that makes any sense.
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
User avatar
Saxicola
Posts: 1759
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:31 pm
Location: Los Angeles area, California

Re: southern Utah

Post by Saxicola »

Peterthecactusguy wrote:wait, what Dean?

I would think that people that are studying cacti aren't just in labs looking at DNA sequences. I mean it makes no sense even if part of the DNA is the same to look at the plants. I mean the way I tell the ones around me is by looking at the flowers more than the forms. As you know O. engelmannii and O. phaeacantha are in close proximity AND so therefore around here we have lots of hybrids between the two.. I am pretty sure that if I labled one one or the other the DNA would match. But then again, I dunno, DNA is sort of a new thing, I know what it is, and all, but still I dont know tons about it.. lol if that makes any sense.

I'm pretty sure he means they only examined herbarium specimens. I'd be shocked if any DNA work was done for a Flora. I know a lot of people get excited about subspecies and varieties but I think it is of very minor importance. The species is the fundamental unit of taxonomy and I really don't see what the point is of formally splitting things up below that level. In my work if I've wanted to discuss differences in regions or populations I do that in a more informal way. Basically the plants are different enough to be different species or they aren't. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for studies of speciation and population biology but a proper study of that type requires much more than morphological observation of plants. DNA work is needed (of a different type than what is done for phylogenies) among other things. I just don't think we get much real benefit by formally subdividing species.
I'm now selling plants on Ebay. Check it out! Kyle's Plants
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: southern Utah

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

Saxicola, I see. I don't really know if it makes sense to do DNA studies on every single var/ssp etc.. of plants. I mean, they would have mostly the same DNA anyways, I would think. I understand they aren't using the full sequences. However looking at plants and doing DNA studies would be interesting, only to see if ALL the Var/ssps are from the parents or maybe from something else. There are quite a few examples in the Cacti family.. esp in Opuntia.. It would be very interesting to see them answer a few questions we all have.. :)

Don't get me wrong, either. I think any research is important, I just find it hard to believe that people have never seen a live plant in habitat that they are doing the sequencing on. That sorta caught me by surprise. I btw know that Dean is working on this stuff as well and I find it very fascinating. Maybe one day will will truly understand the relationships between different cacti, esp in Opuntia since things get lumped in, removed, lumped back in.. etc.. IT gets confusing. I will say this, no matter what they are called I love all the different forms of Opuntia, whether they be Opuntia, Cylidnropuntia, Grusonia (or whatever it's called now) etc..
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
peterb
Posts: 9516
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:19 am
Location: Chandler, Arizona, USA

Re: southern Utah

Post by peterb »

On the contrary, infraspecific designations are of the utmost importance for a useful understanding of the cactus family in habitat. Also, botany has yet to arrive at a clear definition of what a botanical species is. It's still a matter of opinion where one draws the line, no matter how much data one has.

peterb
Zone 9
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: southern Utah

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

So we should then for instance, do studies on all the different Varieties/SSP of cacti and see how they relate to the species.. IE sequence fully Cylindrountia acanthacarpa and compare it to Var thornberi, or coloradonesis... etc.. ?
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
peterb
Posts: 9516
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:19 am
Location: Chandler, Arizona, USA

Re: southern Utah

Post by peterb »

no way to do that kind of minute DNA work, just not enough money. Multivariate analysis is the only practical way to get a sense of the delineations. A great example of this kind of detailed work can be found in Baker's approach to the "coccineus type" Echinocereus of Arizona. He uses chemistry, ploidy, and many different field measurements of several characters like stem size, spine counts, etc. But yes, more research and more detailed study. The C. acanthocarpa complex is a great example where infraspecific taxa are an important part of understanding the species.

peterb

also, current level of DNA studies cannot really tel species apart. Not enough detail. Claims to the contrary are bogus.
Zone 9
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: southern Utah

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

Gotcha PeterB. I mean if you go a few miles in all directions from where I live and I can find different looking C. acanthocarpa forms. Spines are different colors, lengths, etc. It would be interesting to know why some spines are yellow, some gray, some really long and the plants very spiny (even if say they are under a bush) or really short and stubby..
It's interesting to find out information and better understand plants and their relationships with each other.. whether in the same species or not.
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
peterb
Posts: 9516
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:19 am
Location: Chandler, Arizona, USA

Re: southern Utah

Post by peterb »

I have definitely seen a difference between normal variation in spine color and stem shape, etc, and large regular geographical patterns. The maddening thing about these species complexes is the indiviidual plants sometimes are weak forms within strong regional populations. But the large scale patterns are easily visible, to anyone who can get out and walk. Whether or not the regional differences are worthy of taxonomic recognition, they do lend a clearer picture of the species in question.

peterb
Zone 9
User avatar
Peterthecactusguy
Posts: 8862
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:49 am
Location: Black Canyon City, Arizona

Re: southern Utah

Post by Peterthecactusguy »

well, PeterB to be honest I have made most of my observations of cacti from what I have bought, or where I have gone walking. Along the Black Canyon Trail there are really three different segments. The ones south of BCC (on near New River, the other near Table Mesa and the ones south/north of BCC where the differences between the C. acanthocarpa are vast. As for if they alll are worthy of recognition, possibly not, although the most common forms around here in Black Canyon City are C. acanthocarpa var thornberi. There are some plain jane C. acanthocarpa here too, but they tend to have the greyish colored spines, with very few of the yellowish colored ones. And some of the yellowish spined plants seem different in other characteristics as well, not just spine color, but number of spines (more) and stem size (slightly longer)
Here's to you, all you insidious creatures of green..er I mean cacti.
Post Reply