| Mammillaria ID | |
|
|
Author | Message |
---|
Guest Guest
| Subject: Mammillaria ID Sun Dec 20, 2020 6:52 pm | |
| Hello everyone, I'm new here to this blog and starting off with a question: Any opinions concerning the ID ? https://servimg.com/view/20292098/1 I think it could be M. haageana, but it doesn't really fit any of the ssp
What does the crowd say ?
Thanks in advance ! |
|
| |
delandmo
Number of posts : 345 Age : 78 Location : Sutton, Surrey. Registration date : 2011-06-05
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Sun Dec 20, 2020 7:23 pm | |
| Most likely m.haageana sub. acultzingenis. It's probably the camera, but the flower should be more redder for my liking. | |
|
| |
Guest Guest
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Sun Dec 20, 2020 8:06 pm | |
| yes, that's what I was thinking but the flowers don't match. And no, cam is ok, the color is the way it shows on the pic. It's pale pink with darker pink middle stripe. |
|
| |
woltertenhoeve
Number of posts : 348 Registration date : 2009-10-01
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Sun Dec 20, 2020 9:07 pm | |
| The flowers are also quite small and that might point to a connection with M. columbiana (or yucatanensis, ruestii).
Wolter ten Hoeve. | |
|
| |
Guest Guest
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Mon Dec 21, 2020 12:26 am | |
| woltertenhoeve: Hmmmm, yes, it looks a bit like M. columbiana, but columbiana and its ssp has more central spines (mine has only 2) and also the flower color wouldn't fit. And yes, flowers are pretty small...certainly <1cm in diam. |
|
| |
Guest Guest
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Mon Dec 21, 2020 2:30 am | |
| woltertenhoeve: I got some more opinions and the consensus is that you are right. It's M. columbiana ssp yucatanensis.....thanks ! |
|
| |
delandmo
Number of posts : 345 Age : 78 Location : Sutton, Surrey. Registration date : 2011-06-05
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Mon Dec 21, 2020 1:40 pm | |
| I know we all pay great attention to how many central or radial spines a plant has before we make a definite id. and then say, oh well this type is variable, if different from it's original description. But your photo shows, if my eyes are seeing right, that it has only two centrals, whereas in Pilbeam's description of m. columbiana ssp. yucatanensis is four or even five. A big difference maybe. | |
|
| |
Guest Guest
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Mon Dec 21, 2020 2:09 pm | |
| delandmo: that was my original thinking. However, I checked more in detail in found also areoles with 3 spines. The plant is only 2 yrs old,so perhaps, with age, more central spines are produced. What had me doubt the M. haageana idea, was the flower (very small and pink). in any case, what it shows us, is that Mammillaria ID is not an easy feat. |
|
| |
mammillariamaniac
Number of posts : 177 Age : 27 Location : Hamburg, Germany Registration date : 2016-08-19
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Sat Dec 26, 2020 1:21 pm | |
| Hello Harald, I follow Wolter here and agree with Mammillaria columbiana. I was comparing it to my columbiana forms and on a yucatanensis I could find 2 central spines in the apex region if you look closely (picture 1-2). But mostly yucatanensis has 4 central spines. What is known as Mammillaria chiapensis is probably just a form of the subspecies yucatanensis has always 2 central spines (picture 3-4). Kind regards and merry Christmas Jonathan Mam. yucatanensis PCF 2609 Mam. chiapensis ML 373 - El Aguacero, Chis. | |
|
| |
Guest Guest
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID Mon Dec 28, 2020 1:49 pm | |
| |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Mammillaria ID | |
| |
|
| |
| Mammillaria ID | |
|