Odd Monstrose-like growth starting

I've been admiring this plant at my local Home Depot store for the past few months but, up until now have been able to resist buying it. Now it's got some Odd, colorful, monstrose looking growths on it's side! AND it's not just that large lump... there's a smaller one up to the left and another down to the right (seen in pic) Any ideas? I may have to buy it now. No one else seems to want it.
Oh, and can someone id the plant for me? The areoles appear split.

Oh... and yes, that is Glue on the top from the strawflower that was attached at one point :?

Thanks Paul

Maybe this thread should have been started under a different category. Can one of the Moderators move it if so?

Thanks

Hmmm. No ideas or comments on what the growth is? No suggestions or comments as to what the ID of the plant is?

Hi paulzie32, I have looked at your pictures a few times and am struggling as to whether it is in fact a Mammillaria. The nearest I can get to, just looking at the spination, is maybe M. Hernandezii. But a very choice plant such as that growing in a bowl garden in a Home depot I doubt. It is also rather taller than I would expect. The growths could be new offset or as when I first saw it , immediately thought, a bad infestation of mealy bug. Maybe you need to investigate my second option with a gentle probing with a needle or similar. If you get some to come away and squash between the fingers, you should get some dark fluid from them. This being the case, then the plant should be sprayed with an appropriate insecticide. As regards my doubts that it is indeed a Mammillaria, try posting again on another forum specialising in a wider variety of cacti, such as the British Cactus and Succulent Society or similar. Sorry I couldn't be more specific. Derek.

Hey Derek,
Thanks for the response. I was thinking it was Mammillaria huitzilopochtli. Someone on a mailing group suggested M. crucigera, but I don't think so. They (HD) have several bowl gardens (new and old) that have this cactus in them. I just wish they'd sell them as single plants as I hate the glued down rocks and the strawflowers! as for it being mealy bugs... Nope. I've been watching it for a few weeks and has been growing. I've also touched it and its fairly firm... like new growth. It's colorful with tints of pink and yellow.
Someone on another forum stated they felt it "looks a lot like the undifferentiated callous tissue you get when you tissue culture a plant." I sort of agree with this, but don't now if it is possible for a plant to do that.
I'm hoping to get to HD today or tomorrow. I'm going to buy it. I'll let you know what happens

I think that it looks like a crucigera or huitzilopochtlii form, but by no means a typical one. The growth form of hernandezii is very different from this, though one never knows what cultural conditions a plant from a supermarket has been subjected to.

The growths on the sides do look a bit odd, and to me suggests some kind of monstrose growth, stimulated either through unusual growth conditions, or possibly some overdose of chemical fertilisers.

It'll be interesting to see how it does when cultivated normally.

So, I went back tonight and bought the plant! I called first to make sure it was still there and the woman working the Garden Center knows me and was happy to put it aside for me.
When I got there, she there was a Euphorbia obesa in the place where another cactus had died! I mentioned to her that I didn't remember that being there and she just smiled! She also told me the manager told her to take 50% off since the plant had some strange growth on it, Glue left over from the straw flower and one cactus in the pot had died... even though she replaced it

So, here's some more pictures and a couple close ups. It is definitely NOT bugs. the two smaller ones look like old flowers gone wrong. So, I'm guessing there was something that caused the flower buds to start growing weird.... not the scientific term for it I'm sure

Oh... and there were two new pots (bowl plantings) with similar plants in them but these plants were growing in clusters and if this is Mammillaria huitzilopochtli, It's supposed to grow as a solitary plant. What's that Corn Fungus called? Reminds me of huitlacoche.. the Fungus that grows on Corn..??.. Maybe that should be the new name Mammillaria huitlacoche

Take a look and let me know what you think now.








Here's the smaller clump




It has one wide base!

Just my two cents (pennies?): Mammillaria tlalocii is a possibility (already covered by Chris' suggestion of M. crucigera), and that kind of uncontrolled, un-natural growth has showed up occasionaly on the odd plant in my collection, associated in some way to mealy bugs.

HI,
The new pics help a lot. I'm now ditching my suggestions of crucigera and any related species.

That small clump looks like hernandezii to me all right! It has a big tap root as well, so wold fit what you show there.

The big one probably is the same, but a really odd form, probably distorted by too much fertiliser or similar chemicals. M. hernandezii shouldn't grow anywhere near that big, the smaller heads of the second photo are much more realistic.

If you are lucky, you might get flower buds before Xmas and maybe flowers, else they will be there but open in the Spring. Good luck!

Hi Paul,
The second plant backs up my first thoughts of M. Hernandezii and looks as Chris said more normal. Derek.

I just looked up M. hernandezii and my mistake. The smaller, clumping plant is different. Looking at the photo again, the areoles are not split like in the larger plant I have. The only plant I can find that has that type of areole is M. huitzilopochtli. M. crucigera does not seem to have that split. Plus, some of the spines on M. crucigera appear to be flat. Am I incorrect?

Hi Paul, Your second clumping plant is more closer to what I would expect to see in M. hernandezii, and still stick by that. Your first plant is probably M. hernandezii, but for some reason has been growing in an untypical way. Much fatter and larger, and probably why the areoles are more open. It seems you want one of these plants to be M. huitzilopochtli, but I think not. The latter plant has more wool in the axils, none hardly existing in the other two. Would also have long black central spines, but not always. I think if you wait until they flower ( both red flowers ) M. hernandezzi will have much larger showier flowers, nearer the top of the plant and M.huitzilopochtli are much smaller and will be mid way. If you have access to John Pilbeams book of Mammillaria you could see the difference. Derek.

Good evening alltogether,

I hope it is not impertinent, because I´am new here, and identification is not realy my matter. . .
But maybe I could help with some pictures

Mammillaria huitzilopochtli
43747

43746


Mammillaria crucigera
43757

43759


and tomorrow I can take a picture of hernandezii as well. If you like and if it may help a little bit.


Best regards

K.W.

No, Derek,
It's not that I want one of them to be M. huitzilopochtli. The second smaller, clumping plant, at quick glance looked the same and I didn't look that closely to realize the areoles were different. On the larger plant, I have compared (probably) hundreds of photos and there are only a few possible plants I can find that have that split areole. One is labeled as M. huitzilopochtli and the others are forms of M. crucigera.
After looking at pics of both on Mammillarias.net, there seems to be different spine forms shown for M. crucigera. M. crucigera ssp. tlalochii and Mammillaria crucigera ssp crucigera (syn M. crucigera var grandinosa).
Both look extremely similar to images of M. huizilopochtli. Also, M. huitzilopochtli is supposed to (mostly) grow as a solitary plant (when young) and the regular form of M. crucigera is supposed to be a clumping plant with spines described as bristle like, but the other two forms seem to be a bit different.
M. hernandezii is supposed to be a small globular shaped plant and the areole, aside from not being split, are oval and not round like on my plant.
Granted, my plant appears to be a bit etiolate compared to other M. huitzilopochtli plants but it is the correct shape and size... no? So far, i do not see any central spines on any areoles either... and although all images of M. huitzilopochtli I find have some areoles without centrals, there are just about always some that Do.
There is no doubt, people get a misidentification on their plant and then post it as such, leading others to mislable their plants and before you know it, the number of mislabeled plants outnumber the correct images. So, that doesn't help
There is the other plant on Mammillarias.net labeled as Mammillaria crucigera ssp crucigera (syn M. crucigera var grandinosa) that looks to be a pretty closes match to my new plant. but most images are of clumped plants... but that means nothing. Mine could be young.
So, what is Mammillaria crucigera subsp. tlalocii? Is it a legit subspecies, a hybrid or a misidentified plant?
Is MINE a Hybrid? There are similarities in the spines that look match all the above mentioned plants.

If you can show me other features (on the plant I posted) that fit any of these other plants, Please do. I'd like to put a correct label on it. Otherwise I'll just wait until it flowers.
Now, I've put together an image that I think could either help or confuse more.
Which looks more like the spines on my new plant?
And thanks K.W.

Hi Paul, Still not convinced me to change my view. Your pictures of spination of M. hernandezii are a better match than the others. Derek.

Have found pictures of one of my Mammillaria hernandezii,

here we go. . .

42275


42431



Best regards

K.W.

I'm asking you to change My view The areole shape of M. hernandezii is wrong. Mine is round and M. hernandezii is not. Mine is split and M. hernandezii is not. Mine is beige or tan and M. hernandezii is white. M. hernandezii is clumping and mine is not.

I'm now thinking it may be Mammillaria crucigera ssp crucigera (syn M. crucigera var grandinosa)
Chris may have been correct from the beginning

I see what you mean about the split areole now, Paul.

It is, I think, only the first plant that has this characteristic, I can't see it on the smaller multi-headed plant.

Leaving aside the areole for the minute, you say that both plants have fat roots. Do you know if they have a big tap root? That might help in the identification, as the key contenders (hernandezii, huitzilopochtlii and crucigera) have rather different roots.

By the way, at this stage, I wouldn't get too hung up about the various subspecies of crucigera, I have about 4 or 5 different forms of this species and they just show how variable it is. M. huitzilopochtlii also is very variable also, with spination differing, especially as far as central spines are concerned.

Thanks Chris, I'll wiat for flowers and post them when they show up.

K.W. Is that your M. crucigera 43757? I like that! Very nice looking plant.

paulzie32 wrote:

K.W. Is that your M. crucigera 43757? I like that! Very nice looking plant.

Good morning Paul,

thank You very much!
Yes this is my plant. I do´nt find any "full-body-image", but here is another plant. . .

12565

12570


Best regards

K.W.