Mamm TL 742

I recieved the seedlings below from Wolter last year has M.compacticaulis TL 742.
I do not have the location, but these plants look more like duoformis / nunezii with there hooked central spines.

TL742 is from Los Reyes, Michoacan.
Mammillaria compacticaulis shouldn;t have hooked spines. The Reppenhagen collection Rep 1047 from Barranca Honda, Michoacan has straight spines. I saw this plant in Barranca Honda, south of Uruapan in 2010 and there were no signs of hooked spines either.

I woud agree with you, Tam, that this plant has more of duoformis about it than compacticaulis. The link is to a page on Cactus-Art.com .

Here's the plant in habitat:

I have these plants labelled as aff. compacticaulis TL 742. Apparently, Thomas Linzen was not completely sure about the status and therefore added aff. to it.
My seedling plants also form hooked centrals when they get larger.

Wolter.

Wolter, is it possible to get a photograph of the plant in habitat from Thomas ?

I will ask Thomas Linzen for a photo.

Wolter.

I have contacted Thomas Linzen about his TL 742.
His (translated) response was as follows:
"I only have 2 or 3 locality photos which I want to use myself. The attached photo shows a somewhat larger seedling plant, with some final flowers on it.
I am uncertain about the name. I searched for M. compacticaulis, and for forms of M. nagliana at the same time. The Los Reyes location, as Chris points out, lies NW of Uruapan, already close to the border of Michoacan to Jalisco. It is the extended area of M. bambusiphila, compacticaulis, xaltianguensis.
The flower of TL 742 is red, the fruits are green, and the population is probably self-fertile (my plant regularly produces fruits). 4 to 6 central spines are formed, one of them (the lower one) can be hooked occasionally. On older plants this spine is usually straight, only in young plants it is hooked, but later (as said) it is only very rarely hooked. My seedlings too had a hooked lower central spine when they were young.
The area where it grows, the green fruits, the self-fertility, it all speaks against M. duoformis, more likely it is a member of the group around M. bambusiphila/xaltianguensis. Quite clearly, it is not the typical M. compacticaulis, as described by Reppenhagen. That's why I added the prefix aff. However, I think that it is closely related to M. compacticaulis."
I hope that this info and the attached photo of a larger TL 742 plant are useful.

Wolter.

Hi Wolter,

Many thanks for taking the time to obtain this information. Very interesting.
I sse more of aff. xaltianguensis (longer spines, esp the lower one ) than compacticaulis but will wait for Thomas's write up.