Mammillaria huitzilopochtli -- very first flower!

[Steve Johnson]

Tiny, but the color is so nice -- think my Epithelanthas might be jealous!

[KittieKAT]

Wow congrats i see many more will soon follow its lead and give a show!
Post some pictures when it really lights up with blooms!!

[DaveW]

Yes a variable plant Steve. I gather some eventually produce centrals, as yours is doing at the crown, whilst others never do.

A pretty horrible name to pronounce, dreamed up by David Hunt and named after the Aztec god of war and of the sun, Huitzilopotchli.

If anybody wonders how to pronounce it correctly see this link:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX0wn3awl0E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As said, centrals spines can eventually be present or absent in older plants:-

http://www.cactus-art.biz/schede/MAMMIL ... ochtli.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.cactus-succulents.com/Mammil ... chtli.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The variety niduliformis has the longest centrals:-

http://www.cactus-art.biz/schede/MAMMIL ... formis.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Astro]

I thought M. huitzilopochtli didn't have the thick radial spines, which indicate M. crucigera to me. At least, once upon a time I had a very similar looking plant labeled as such.

Then again, I'm sure these species are quite variable and all these forms may just be lumped under one name nowadays - I'm no Mamm expert.

[DaveW]

Dave Ferguson's classification of Mammillaria, which differs somewhat from Hunt's lists them as:-

"M. crucigera (incl. buchenaui, grandinosa, huitzilopochtli)"

Therefore he lumps them all under M. crucigera.

http://www.mammillarias.net/dave.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It seems each valley has a different variant Astro. See the following article and the picture of huitzilopotchli with central spines at the end:-

http://www.cactus-mall.com/mammsoc/MFN/MFN7w.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As I understand it, though obviously related, M. crucigera has only small central spines up to 2mm long?

http://www.cactus-art.biz/schede/MAMMIL ... cigera.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Maybe you actually had M. huitzilopotchtli, misidentified by the dealer as crucigera that was lost to cultivation for a time and when rediscovered was at first re-described as M. falsicrucigera and then as M. buchenauii, until it was realised it was the old already described M. crucigera?

[A. Dean Stock]

Hunt should be beaten with a sclerocactus for naming that plant with such a horrible name. Ferguson's treatment of Mammillaria is not accepted by most taxonomists so for the time being I'd stick with Hunt's treatment.
Dean

[Steve Johnson]

Hunt should be beaten with a sclerocactus for naming that plant with such a horrible name.

I normally don't have trouble with difficult pronunciations, but even this one has me flummoxed. Yep -- horrible name, but such a wonderfully odd and pretty little addition to my Mammillaria contingent! I'll definitely look forward to seeing more flowers.

[DaveW]

Hunt was not the only one to use unpronounceable Aztec gods though Dean, Mammillaria tlalocii of Reppenhagen, often reduced in rank under crucigera, was also named after Tlaloc an Aztec god. Again if anybody wants to know the correct pronunciation see the following link and then just add "ii" on the end:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I4zsdVSp3E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/597478/Tlaloc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lets hope they soon run out of Aztec gods to use!

http://www.cactus-art.biz/schede/MAMMIL ... _FO229.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[7george]

Very nice plant, how old is it? I have some seedlings that are quite slow in growth even with big centrals already. May be we should nickname our plants at least for a home use.

[Steve Johnson]

Very nice plant, how old is it?

Wish I knew more precisely, although my guess would be about 5-6 years old. Comes from Mesa Garden, and I'm pretty sure the plant was grown from seed by the Bracks. The huitzilopochtli wasn't mature enough to flower when I got it in summer 2013, so the Mamm experts out there should be able to give us a better idea.

[A. Dean Stock]

Dave, thanks for the help but even after living in southern Mexico for a year doing research, I still can't pronounce the name the way the "locals" did. I agree about Aztec names. Very nice plant even if I can't pronounce its name.
Dean

[7george]

Yes a variable plant Steve. I gather some eventually produce centrals, as yours is doing at the crown, whilst others never do.

==

Actually I can see ~6 brown centrals at most areoles of this plant. Hunt describes it just as "variable;". Radials should be those white ones in the ring below.

[A. Dean Stock]

The plant above doesn't have the single enlarged central spine that is present in the examples given above for this species. 7george is right, there are about 20 radials and 5 to 6 short, brown central spines, none of which is enlarged as is often seen in plants labeled M. Huitzilopochtli. It does appear to be developing an enlarged central spine in areoles at the apex. That might to be reason enough to suspect the identification since other plants identified as M. Huitzilopochtli lack the smaller brown central spines. On the other hand who is to say the plants in photos on the web are identified correctly. I haven't read the original description.
Dean

[DaveW]

I may possibly have the original description Dean so will try and look it out as it was published in Cactus & Succulent Journal of Great Britain, 41(4): 106 (1979).

Meanwhile I presume this one by Mammillarias.net is a copy of it, but not sure they have not transposed radials and centrals size?

http://mammillarias.net/gallery/mammill ... htli&lg=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course when a plant is originally described the extent of variation of the population is not always known, so an atypical example may be described as the type species. The clickable pictures in the above link by Michel Lacoste, which apear to show plants in habitat do show considerable variation in central spine development.

[A. Dean Stock]

Thanks Dave. If the Mammilarias.net photos of M. huitzilopochtli and description are accurate then I'd have to say that the plant above, in question, is not M. huitzilopochtli. Having 6 short, brown centrals vs a single elongated, black central is just too much of a difference to be the same species.
Dean