Another unknown Haag...

[Tony]

The seed came from Mesa as Haageocereus martitmus, KK1105, coastal Peru, frosted white spines.
Now that I have 10 of these suckers I would really like to know what they are.
I have searched on the net and the few books that I have and H. martitmus doesnt seem to be a valid name these days.
Anyone have any more information on this plants current ID?
Images are here... http://cactiguide.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 68#p234968" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks!

[Pilif]

well, except for that you seem to have the wrong name (KK 1105 is haageocereus maritimus, as per http://ralph.cs.cf.ac.uk/Cacti/fieldno.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) I can't find anything about it. Knize does seem to have the horrible attitude of giving everything he collects a new name...

[phil_SK]

This name doesn't appear on the IPNI database and so was almost certainly never validly published - standard practice for Knize Knonsense Knames. Searching Ralph Martin's database shows that it was collected at Camana. Assuming this is correct, I did a reverse search to see what else has been collected at Camana and all the Haageocereus are decumbens or synonyms of decumbens (mamillatus, chalaensis)., so decumbens is a fair bet for plants under this name.

[Pilif]

I did a reverse search to see what else has been collected at Camana

Huh, that's quite clever
going to remember that

[Tony]

Great! I thank you both.

[Tony]

Here is the largest of the seedlings so far.

Haageocereus who?

Summer stuff 025.JPG (84.83 KiB) Viewed 7508 times

Unknown next to our suspected Haag. decumbens OST 94941

Summer stuff 023.JPG (93.79 KiB) Viewed 7508 times

Does it look like the Haageocereus chalaensis plants you now have, Tristan?

[DaveW]

Looks similar to decumbens or chalaensis:-

http://cactushabitat.com/Peru/Arequipa/ ... mbens.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://cactushabitat.com/Peru/Arequipa/ ... nsis2.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As has been said by others above, Karel Knize often makes up new names for his plants that never get published and if they were would immediately be reduced to synonymy under presently known species. That is not to say he has not discovered some genuinely new species. Many nurserymen do this since many collectors only want to buy plants with names rather than "Haageocereus sp." even if the names are completely invalid.

Looking at my KK numbers list (Ralph used my KK list and others like Ritter's I had already put on computer when starting his database) it gives for KK 1105 Haageocereus maritimus, Camana, 200-500m as Phil says.

Similar Haageocereus grow not far from the sea in this region of Peru, so maritimus = "by the sea" would be an obvious name to give it if it did not already have a legitimate one.

[Minime8484]

Tony,
I actually have one of the plants from the H. maritimus collection that you gave me a while back; it is doing wonderfully in-ground here!
Here is the pic of this plant (Haageocereus maritimus KK1105 from Camana, Peru):

IMG_0630.JPG (51.37 KiB) Viewed 7480 times

The plant I received as Haageocereus chalaensis recently is the from the same plant pictured here http://www.cactiguide.com/cactus/?genus ... chalaensis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . Here is a pic of my plant:

IMG_0629.JPG (67.83 KiB) Viewed 7480 times

I also have a plant of what was sold as Loxanthocereus gracilis (sold by Mesa Garden) that based on your same plant turned out to be Haageocereus decumbens that you have in your pics; unfortunately, the longest arm rotted off this year for unknown reasons, so all I have left is this pup (though the original plant looked identical to your large plant):

IMG_0633.JPG (60.83 KiB) Viewed 7480 times

Looking at these photos - and of photos on the Internet (which I know can be suspect), including the plant mentioned above under H. chalaensis - lead me to suspect there are two phenotypes found in a very small area of Arequipa in Peru...and may certainly represent two separate species - H. decumbens & H. chalaensis - where the latter is the one with heavier spinage/armor (at least in cultivation; in the wild, all plants seem to be more fiercely armed!).

I definitely see more similarities of the plants of H. maritimus to H. chalaensis than to H. decumbens.

The ultra-confusing (more) thing about the mess is that my H. chalaensis supposedly came from the collection of OST 94941 and after initially mis-identifying the original collection as Loxanthocereus gracilis (=L. sextonianus=Cleistocactus sextonianus), Carlos Ostolaza has now re-identified the plant as definitely H. chalaensis (per J. Menzel).

BUT - both Tony's and my plant we have ID'd as H. decumbens ALSO supposedly came from the OST 94941 collection!

It may be possible that the OST 94941 collection was of multiple plants in the same area where two phenotypes/taxa were found, so the seeds of each are now mixed up in that collection. That's only a potential theory on my part. It just seems very strange that two very different phenotypes are found supposedly within the same collection.

Of course, as Anderson notes, H. chalaensis may just be the same as H. decumbens anyhow, although if the OST94941 collection is behind that statement, that just confuses things more!

For now, I'm leaning towards assigning the name H. chalaensis to my H. maritimus plant.

Someone desperately needs to take a research trip to western Peru....I volunteer!

That's more than two cents worth, so just keep the change.

[DaveW]

I think somebody who gave a lecture at the UK Cactus Explorers Weekends did show these plants in habitat but I can't remember who it was now, so there are people visiting the habitat.

Regarding OST 94941 there is a picture of it in an article by Aymeric de Barmon in Cactus Explorer 2, pages 17-18. the habitat is given as Atiquipa though, not to be confused with Arequipa:-

http://www.cactusexplorers.org.uk/journal6.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Minime8484]

the habitat is given as Atiquipa though, not to be confused with Arequipa:-

The Atiquipa District is indeed located in the Region of Arequipa (formerly Dpto. of Arequipa).

[Tony]

Thanks for the info Tristan and dave!

[DaveW]

Just used Google maps to find Atiquipa in relation to Camana:-

ATIQUIPA.png (318.68 KiB) Viewed 7445 times

Probably similar Haageocereus of the decumbens type occur along this area of coast.