CactiGuide.com

I was at a local nursery the other day and noticed a flat of these striking Coryphantha labeled C. elephantidens, but that does not seem right. My first impression is C. robustispina (C. scheeri v. robustispina). Am I completely wrong here?

I think you're right.

I agree with you and greenknight, but it should technically be called Coryphantha robustispina var. robustispina.

Was the nursery retail? If so they may have guessed what species name to use. If it was a wholesale nursery whoever named it was out to lunch too long.

Regardless of what they named it, those are well grown "Pineapple cactus".

tumamoc wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 9:53 pm I was at a local nursery the other day and noticed a flat of these striking Coryphantha labeled C. elephantidens, but that does not seem right. My first impression is C. robustispina (C. scheeri v. robustispina). Am I completely wrong here?
IMG_20220909_142020575.jpg
IMG_20220909_142043454_HDR.jpg

Yeah, robustispina for sure! Can you share the name of nursery? I wouldn't mind buying a couple of those

Thanks for the feedback. I thought I was losing my mind for a minute there.

A_G_R wrote:Yeah, robustispina for sure! Can you share the name of nursery? I wouldn't mind buying a couple of those

Desert Survivors

In case beginners are confused, as Tom says the name of the type form retains the same name for all subspecific epithets = C. robustispina ssp. robustispina v. robustispina f. robustispina, but we normally shorten it to just those infraspecific levels needed to identify it at the time = C. robustispina.

The only place you will usually find the type form fully listed to all required subspecific ranks is in keys for identification in order to distinguish it from other sub specific forms. However, as Tom says if you see a plant listed with all infraspecific ranks having the same name it simply means it was the first described type form = C. robustispina and not one of the later described varieties or forms..

Though I have occasionally seen the type form keyed out to most of their lower ranks I cannot find an example on Google!

Also, these days Botany is tending to follow Zoology and use subspecies (ssp.) instead of variety. However, unless formally renamed variety (v.) is still a legal designation under the "Rules", as is forma (f.). Present botanical practice tends to not bother formally distinguishing any variation below the rank of subspecies, but it is still within the "Rules" to do so I believe?