P. magnifica vs. P. warasii - the Eriocactus Debate

[daiv]

AKA Notocactus

In another ID thread, the discussion came up again about the Parodia/Nototcactus that can be considered the "Eriocactus group" based on previous taxonomy. Most similar of the two being magnifica and warasii.

This thread may start with my own comparison of my two plants, but I welcome any other input on it. Such as your unknown plants, other species (P. nigrispina, schumannii, etc.) or whatever comments fit the "Eriocactus" idea.

So to start here are my two side by side - magnifica on the left and warasii on the right:


Note: These are relatively large plants - both in 8 or 10 inch pots (I can't remember which!)

Now here is a close-up of magnifica


and same angle for warasii


Now the top view of magnifica


and warasii

[daiv]

Now some observations:

Overall, magnifica has fewer ribs and a more dome-shaped body. Warasii is more of a short-columnar with more and closer-spaced ribs. Also magnifica tends to more readily pup while warasii tends to be solitary. Finally, there is a glauchous-blue color while warasii has a sharp green epidermis.

Looking closer: The areoles of magnifica tend to blend into each other giving the appearance of one continuous areole all down the ribs. Warasii tends to have spaces between the areoles. Magnifica seems to have a felty areole even outdoors or on older growth. In my example of warasii you can see lots of felt or wool on the close-up, but this washes off easily in rain or with the sprinkler hose. Notice how the older growth on mine lacks this.

Spines seem to be variably similar between the two. In my example it looks like magnifica has more spines, but I think with two different plants, the situation could just as easily be reversed. Sprawling, thin, flexible yellow spines about 1/2 inch or so in length.

I can add a follow up with flowers, but the two are rather indistinguishable. Perhaps the buds are a little more reddish colored on warasii vs. magnifica?

[daiv]

Flowers - these won't help you with ID. They also look identical to the other "Eriocactus" species, but just for the sake of being complete here they are:

magnifica


warasii
[img]http:600:450]http://www.cactiguide.com/forum/userpix ... asii_1.jpg[/img]

Color difference is simply due to lighting.

[bahro]

Thank you, this was very interesting and helpful! After this I think I have P. magnifica

[iann]

Very distinctive mature plants. Youngsters are a bit more "androgynous" Still you would probably name this one easily.


I also have this one More ribs, darker body, darker spines, bigger, but never flowered.

[Rebel Squirrel]

Thanks again for posting this Daiv!

Also what Iann said about mature plants vs. babies. If you look at the pups the immature magnifica really looks a lot more warasii-like than the mature head does which probably contributes to a great deal of the "I bought this little plant, what is it?" confusion.

Anybody got an immature confirmed warasii to compare to the immature magnifica?

[K. Neal]

Thank you daiv,very helpful.I think I'll have to rename my P.magnifica to warasii

[daiv]

Ian, first is warasii, the second a nigrispina?

Very good point on the age of the plants. Definitely easier to tell apart when they are big.

Here are pics of the same two plants when they were younger. I'd say these would have been comfortable in a 4 inch pot.

First magnifica


And then warasii


I should have thought of this at the start and factored it into my observations. Notice that the areoles are separated on the young magnifica. Also the smaller proportions gives and illusion of more close-spaced ribs.

Even so, look at how much less prominent the areoles are on the warasii.

[SnowFella]

See what you recon about these 3, looks to me like I might just have 3 Noto/Parodia magnifica and no warasii.

Small and clumping, came with a N. magnifica var minor label


Larger and came with 3 pups that I have cut and planted on it's own. No labels on it when I got it.


Small and solitary, very pale in colour. Came with a N. magnifica label.

[peterb]

I think leninghausii fits fairly comfortably in this group. I haven't been able to get mine to flower here in PHX in a long time (it sets buds early in the season that then abort when the heat hits).

peterb

[*Barracuda_52*]

Heres a few to pick at.. LOL!! No tags came with these..

Group shot


#1.



#2.



#3.



Hey Iann this one looks almost like that last one you posted.. I grew these from seed, i have 3 that look like this one and then 3 that have tan/whiteish spines. Seeds were labled as schumannii.

[iann]

P. schumanniana indeed. That's a lot of P. magnifica plants you have! And just maybe a couple of something else ...

[daiv]

I would say those are all P. magnifica (except the schumanniana of course).

These other plants show why it can be so confusing. Especially Snowfella's second image.

[daiv]

Other Eriocactus from the guide, but added to the post to make it easier to compare:

Larger P. schumanniana:


P. schumanniana ssp. claviceps


P. leninghausii


P. nigrispina


Certainly leninghausii is the easiest to distinguish at any age.

Finally here is a shot with several species from my (late ) friend Kermit. These are really spoiled plants and that one in front with flowers is actually warasii with magnifica immediately behind it and right of it and the same leninghausii from above:

[hob]

i tend to think of magnifica as having less ribs than warasii and a blueish tinge to the skin

i'm fairly sure there are hybrids between the 2 around as well