Mammillaria mystax forms

Geschrieben Mittwoch, Juni 18, 2008 @ 10:50:52


First is a plant grown from Koehres seed K4715 named as Mammillaria crispisaeta, but looking like mystax to me.



and then Mammillaria erythra R1375 from Koehres seed K4795, which is apparently synonymous with mystax

Hey Chris,

is it possible to repost pictures of this post? I would be very interested in pictures of these plants, especially the Mam. erythra Rep 1375.

Regards

Here is the photo from 2008 of M. erythra, R1375. I am still looking for the crispisaeta, which doesn't appear to be in my collection unless it has got hidden somehow in my database. I'll check again later.



Update: Sorry Jonathan, I certainly don't have the plant, and I've been through all my 2008 and 2007 photos without success. I do remember the name, but not the plant. However checking my plants, I have found two plants labelled as M. karwinskiana v. multiseta which clearly aren't karwinskiana, so it does seem I had got some problem with my labels, and they date from about that time.

In an old collection that I was able to visit some time ago, I met Mammillaria crispiseta - non crispisaeta - R.T. Craig, 1945.
I brought her pictures in the dedicated post in the Gallery.
I think I still have a couple of them in my collection.
If you want i'll photograph it today and place it tomorrow.

OK, I have located the photo of what I said was crispisaeta! I did this by going in to edit my very original post, and it had the image filename DSC7125.jpg in the link that no longer works.
So I found the image using this and I attach it below.



Of course I recognised the plant, but more importantly the label - which clearly says schilinskiana. In my records it says I grew this plant from Koehres seed 4727, sown in 1992.

So I must have been very confused in 2008! Taking a photo of the wrong plant is not very clever. And so I conclude I don't have either a plant or a photo of M. crispisaeta.

Apologies.

M. crispiseta Craig, Mamm. Handbook 308, fig. 280. 1945
Stem simple (or dividing dichotomously?), flattened-globular. withmilky
sap; axils, with long white bristles. Central spines, 4-5 , 7-18mm. long,
acicular, variable in colour from cream to black; radial spines 8, 4-7mm. long,
slender acicular. Fls. undescribed. Fruit clavate 15mm. with dried perianth
persistent; seeds brown.
Mexico: Locality unknown. Described from a living plant obtained
from Schmoll, no. 718.




My Mammillaria crispiseta founded in an old collection in Alessandria….

Chris your photo of m. erythra which does bear that label in the picture,has quite long spines, whereas the photo of m. crispiseta, has short spines. I thought the name m.erythra applied to plants with short spines.

Yes, the shorter spines of M. erythra was the reason that it was described as being significantly different from M. mystax. My plant with that name has longer spines, and I can't explain why. My records clearly show that I had grown it from Koehres seed. I have labelled it as M. erythra and the field number Rep 1375, though I have considered it as synonymous with M. mystax.

Its interesting though, that in my plants of M. mystax, about 8 or 9 now, the spine length varies very considerably. It may very well be that erythra was named for a short spined form, but its inherent genetics is just as variable as the rest of the mystax's.

I think I'll change the label to M. mystax Rep 1375 and leave it at that. It comes from Puebla, between Azumbilla and Esperanza. I have been to those parts, and seen M. mystax in a variety of forms. Some had curly spines and some short and some straight and long, some a bit curved. The consolidation to all being M. mystax seems right to me.

Here is a photo of my M. erythra Rep 879. I bought the two plants several years ago from Uwe Lehmann.

Hi everyone,

at first thanks for all the pictures. I compared REM-photographs of M. erythra seeds with different to Mam. mystax related species, aswell as the distribution area. My conclusion Mam. erythra is the link between Mam. mystax and Mam. sartorii. The testa structure of the M. erythra seed is much closer to Mam. mystax, then to any other member. What was aswell interesting, that Mam. casoi and Mam. huajuapensis had much more differences in the testa structure, so I believe they are not as close to Mam. mystax than Mam. erythra. In the Loseblattsammlung written by Thomas Linzen in 1995 for the AfM, he mentions M. huajuapensis and M. casoi deserve the status of a variety subordinated under M. mystax. So Mam. erythra stays just a form of M. mystax?

Back to the question I actually had, I obtained a really nice specimen of Mam. erythra recently, that was sown from Köhres seed. But my plant looks not like the picture of the Rep 1375 you were showing Chris or as your M. crispiseta Maurizo. I also compared my plant with another picture of the Rep 1375 shown in a german cacti forum, but it also had a lot similarities to the Rep 1375 of Chris. Check here: https://servimg.com/view/19391002/1253
Can it be the Rep 879 (K 4855)? But it clearly doesnt show the nice bristles like on Wolters (see pictures) and shorter spines
Was there any other M. erythra seed sold by Köhres years ago?