diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 1221.txt | 2886 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 1221.zip | bin | 0 -> 42813 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 |
5 files changed, 2902 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/1221.txt b/1221.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bfbfccc --- /dev/null +++ b/1221.txt @@ -0,0 +1,2886 @@ +The Project Gutenberg Etext of North American Species of Cactus +by John M. Coulter + + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check +the copyright laws for your country before posting these files!! + +Please take a look at the important information in this header. +We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an +electronic path open for the next readers. Do not remove this. + + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations* + +Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and +further information is included below. We need your donations. + + +The North American Species of Cactus, Anhalonium, and Lophophora + +by John M. Coulter + +June, 1998 [Etext #1221] + + +The Project Gutenberg Etext of North American Species of Cactus +*****This file should be named 1221.txt or 1221.zip****** + + +This etext was prepared by Dave Emme: demme@ix.netcom.com + + +Project Gutenberg Etexts are usually created from multiple editions, +all of which are in the Public Domain in the United States, unless a +copyright notice is included. Therefore, we do NOT keep these books +in compliance with any particular paper edition, usually otherwise. + + +We are now trying to release all our books one month in advance +of the official release dates, for time for better editing. + +Please note: neither this list nor its contents are final till +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. To be sure you have an +up to date first edition [xxxxx10x.xxx] please check file sizes +in the first week of the next month. Since our ftp program has +a bug in it that scrambles the date [tried to fix and failed] a +look at the file size will have to do, but we will try to see a +new copy has at least one byte more or less. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +fifty hours is one conservative estimate for how long it we take +to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. This +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If our value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour this year as we release thirty-two text +files per month, or 384 more Etexts in 1998 for a total of 1500+ +If these reach just 10% of the computerized population, then the +total should reach over 150 billion Etexts given away. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext +Files by the December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000=Trillion] +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only 10% of the present number of computer users. 2001 +should have at least twice as many computer users as that, so it +will require us reaching less than 5% of the users in 2001. + + +We need your donations more than ever! + + +All donations should be made to "Project Gutenberg/CMU": and are +tax deductible to the extent allowable by law. (CMU = Carnegie- +Mellon University). + +For these and other matters, please mail to: + +Project Gutenberg +P. O. Box 2782 +Champaign, IL 61825 + +When all other email fails try our Executive Director: +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> + +We would prefer to send you this information by email +(Internet, Bitnet, Compuserve, ATTMAIL or MCImail). + +****** +If you have an FTP program (or emulator), please +FTP directly to the Project Gutenberg archives: +[Mac users, do NOT point and click. . .type] + +ftp uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu +login: anonymous +password: your@login +cd etext/etext90 through /etext96 +or cd etext/articles [get suggest gut for more information] +dir [to see files] +get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files] +GET INDEX?00.GUT +for a list of books +and +GET NEW GUT for general information +and +MGET GUT* for newsletters. + +**Information prepared by the Project Gutenberg legal advisor** +(Three Pages) + + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG- +tm etexts, is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor +Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association at +Carnegie-Mellon University (the "Project"). Among other +things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext +under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this +etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors, +officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost +and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or +indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause: +[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification, +or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by +disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word pro- + cessing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the etext (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the + net profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Association/Carnegie-Mellon + University" within the 60 days following each + date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare) + your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time, +scanning machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty +free copyright licenses, and every other sort of contribution +you can think of. Money should be paid to "Project Gutenberg +Association / Carnegie-Mellon University". + +*END*THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END* + + + + + +This etext was prepared by Dave Emme: demme@ix.netcom.com + + + + + +A Preliminary Revision of the North American Species of Cactus, +Anhalonium, and Lophophora by John M. Coulter. + + + + +U. S. Department of Agriculture +Division of Botany +CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE U. S. NATIONAL HERBARIUM +Vol. III--No. 2 +Issued June 10, 1894 +Preliminary Revision of the North American Species of Cactus, +Anhalonium, and Lophophora. +by +John M. Coulter. +Published by Authority of the Secretary of Agriculture +Washington +Government Printing Office +1894 +LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL +U. S. Department of Agriculture +Division of Botany +Washington, D. C., March 21, 1894 +SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith, for publication as +Vol. III, No. 2, of Contributions from the U. S. National +Herbarium, a Preliminary Revision of the North American species +of Cactus, Anhalonium, and Lophophora, by President John M. +Coulter. +Respectfully, +Frederick V. Coville, +Chief of the Division of Botany. +Hon. J. Sterling Morton, +Secretary of Agriculture. + + + + +PRELIMINARY REVISION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN SPECIES +OF CACTUS, ANHALONIUM, AND LOPHOPHORA. +Prefatory Note. +In the fall of 1890 Dr. George Vasey, then Botanist of the +Department of Agriculture, arranged with me to prepare a revision +of North American Cactaceae. Owing to the peculiar difficulty of +preserving material the family was poorly represented, even in +our leading herbaria. To secure a large amount of additional +material in the way of specimens and field notes the Department +authorized me to visit the region of the Mexican boundary during +the summer of 1891. Preliminary to this exploration it was +necessary to examine the Engelmann collection of Cactaceae, in +the possession of the Missouri Botanical Garden. This +collection, supplemented by the continual additions made at the +garden, is by far the largest collection of skeletons and living +specimens in this country, and also contains the large majority +of our types. + +In March, 1891, I visited this collection and made such notes as +seemed necessary for use in the field, and in June, accompanied +by Mr. W. H. Evans and Mr. G. C. Nealley, I began field work in +the neighborhood of El Paso, Tex. After ten days of exploration +it was necessary for me to leave the field work in charge of Mr. +Evans, who, with Mr. Nealley, continued work westward, during +July and a part of August, to southern California, along the +Southern Pacific Railway. As a result a large number of complete +plant bodies was secured, but very few of them were in flower and +the field notes indicated little besides collection stations. +During the following fall and winter preliminary determinations +of this material were made by Mr. Evans. +In the fall of 1892 critical study of this and other collections +was begun in connection with my assistants, Dr. Elmon M. Fisher +and Mr. Edwin B. Uline, who have ever since rendered constant and +most import assistance in the examination of material and +bibliography, which alone has made the work possible in the midst +of other pressing duties. + +In the spring of 1893 these two gentlemen spent several weeks at +the Missouri Botanical Garden in the critical study of its rich +material, and during the latter part of their stay I assisted in +the work. Dr. William Trelease, the director of the garden, had +hastened the arrangement of the Engelmann material, and had +mounted in convenient form the large mass of notes left by Dr. +Engelmann. These notes contained not only critical remarks upon +known species, but also the diagnoses of many unpublished species +which had come into his hands, notably those collected by Mr. +William Gabb in 1867 in Lower California. The collections that +have thus far been studied are: + +(1) Those of the Missouri Botanical Garden; and thanks are +especially due to Dr. Trelease for his generous cooperation in +the use of this material, without which the work would have been +impossible. + +(2) Those of the Department of Agriculture, including the results +of several recent explorations, for the use of which I am +indebted to Mr. Frederick V. Coville. + +(3) Those of the Gray Herbarium at Harvard University, which Dr. +B. L. Robinson kindly placed at my disposal. + +(4) Those of the California Academy of Sciences, notably rich in +forms from Lower California and the adjacent islands, kindly +loaned by Mr. T. S. Brandegee. + +(5) Those of Dr. Louis Eschanzier, of San Luis Potosi, Mexico, +who send a large series of Mexican forms collected in 1891. + +(6) Numerous small sets from different correspondents, who have +given both time and material in aiding the work. + +It is needless to say that Dr. George Engelmann, the great +pioneer student of this difficult family, has opened the paths in +which we must follow, and it was exceedingly unfortunate that he +was not able to complete the final revision that he had in mind. + +The difficulties which beset the critical study of this group can +not be easily exaggerated. Such scanty material as has been +collected has been for the most part very incomplete, consisting +of plant bodies without flower or fruit, flower or fruit without +plant bodies, and bunches of spines without either. The species +are displayed also in the most inaccessible regions, and their +culmination is found in the still poorly known regions of Mexico. + +On account of their singular forms and often brilliant flowers +they have long been extensively cultivated, especially in Europe. +These cultivated forms have formed the basis of original +descriptions in almost all of the European publications, and in +very rare cases have any types been preserved. As a result, the +bibliography of Cactaceae is appalling, and it is questionable +whether satisfactory conclusions can be reached in the case of +hundreds of published names. The earlier descriptions were not +only meager, but were based upon what are now regarded very +insufficient characters, and in the absence of types it is not +only unsafe, but impossible to venture an opinion concerning +their identity. In view of these facts, I have thought it +advisable to present a preliminary revision of the order, which +shall contain the results of the study of material confessedly +insufficient. With such knowledge as we possess brought +together, it is hoped that the study of this very interesting and +much neglected group will be stimulated, and that more critical +exploration of our southwestern territory and adjacent Mexico +will make a more satisfactory presentation possible. It would be +useless to notice the vast number of reputed species that are not +represented by actual specimens in our possession. + +In the proposed preliminary account of the family, of which the +present paper is the first part, only those genera are considered +which form a part of the flora of the United States, and those +species which I have been able to examine and to identify with +reasonable certainty. All forms credited to the United States +have been studied, and the account of these species may be +considered fairly complete, but the far more numerous Mexican +species are but scantily represented. The Mexican boundary is so +unnatural a dividing line in the distribution of Cactaceae that +it has been disregarded, and all the species studied have been +arranged in a lineal series of uniform prominence. So far as +known the subject of geographical distribution is considered, but +it will be seen how meager is our knowledge of this subject. It +is to be hoped that this preliminary presentation will provoke +exploration and study, and that species will not only be +collected, but all the facts of their distribution noted. It is +more than probable that our present notion of species in this +group must be much modified, and doubtless many forms are at +present kept specifically distinct which will prove to be but +different phases of a single species. + +In the matter of generic delimitation we are in still greater +uncertainty, and several generic lines at present recognized must +be regarded as purely arbitrary, a fact which must become still +more evident with additional material. The whole group is to be +regarded as made up of poorly differentiated forms and only long +observation under cultivation can determine the possibilities of +specific variation under the influence of environment, of age, of +inherent tendencies. For instance, that these plants change in +form and in spine characters with increasing age and after they +have begun to flower can not be doubted, but what described forms +have thus been separated in descriptions can only be guessed at. + +John M. Coulter. +Lake Forest University, +Lake Forest, Ill., January, 1891. + + + + +CACTUS, ANHALONIUM, AND LOPHOPHORA. + +1. CACTUS Linn. Sp. Pl. 466 (1753), restricted. + +MAMILLARIA Haw. Synop. 177 (1812), not Stackh. (1809). + +Usually globose to oblong plants (simple, branching or +cespitose), but sometimes slender-cylindrical, covered with +spine-bearing tubercles: flower-bearing areola axillary (with +reference to tubercles), entirely separate from the terminal +spine-bearing areola, although sometimes (Coryphantha) connected +with it by a woolly groove along the upper face of the tubercle: +ovary naked: seeds smooth or pitted: embryo usually straight, +with short cotyledons. Originally defined by Linnaeus in his +Systema, ed. l (1735). + +The Linnaean genus Cactus of 1753 included 22 species and was +coextensive with the present order. In 1812 the species were +separated by Haworth into five genera, the original generic name +Cactus being discarded. Among these species C. mamillaris seems +to have stood as the type, not only of the Linnaean genus Cactus, +but also of Haworth's Mamillaria, and as such should retain the +original generic name. Besides, Mamillaria was used as the +generic name of an alga in 1809. Cactus mamillaris L. is the +West Indian Mamillaria simplex Haw. + +From one point of view the two sections of the genus +(Eumamillaria and Coryphantha) deserve generic separation, for +the character of grooveless and grooved tubercles seems to hold +without exception, and the sections are separated with more +certainty than are certain species of Coryphantha and +Echinocactus. If genera are simply groups of convenience the +separation should be made. + +I. EUMAMILLARIA. Flowers from the axils of the older or +full-grown tubercles (hence usually appearing lateral), mostly +small, and generally from whitish to pink or red: tubercles never +grooved: fruit almost always clavate and scarlet. + +A. Tubercles more or less quadrangular. + +* Central spines not hooked. ++ More than one central spine. + + +1. Cactus alternatus, sp. nov. + +Subglobose, 10 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles long (15 to 20 +mm.) and spreading, with woolly axils: radial spines 3, rigid and +recurved, 5 mm. long; central spines 3, very stout and much +recurved, 20 to 30 mm. long, alternating with the radials; all +ashy colored and often twisted: flower and fruit unknown.--Type +in Herb. Coulter. + +The few spines, with the very short radials alternating with the +very long and stout centrals, furnish a striking character. +Occasionally one of the centrals is wanting. + +2.Cactus acanthophlegmus (Lehm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 +(1891). + + Mamillaria acanthophlegma Lehm. Delect. Sem. Hamb. (1833) + +Subglobose with a deeply depressed vertex, or becoming +cylindrical, 3 to 8.5 cm. in diameter: tubercles sharply +quadrangular-conical, with densely woolly axils: radial spines 15 +to 30, white, very slender (bristly) and radiant, sometimes +coarse capillary, 4 to 7 mm. long, interwoven with those of +neighboring tubercles and so covering the whole plant; central +spines 2 to 4, robust and straight, erect or divergent, whitish +or reddish, black-tipped, 5 to 6.5 mm. long: flowers reddish, 1 +to 2 cm. broad: fruit unknown. Type unknown. + +From Coahuila and San Luis Potosi to Oaxaca. Fl. May. + +Specimens examined: Coahuila (Poselger of 1856; Pringle 3116 of +1890): San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891). + +The central spines are quite variable in number and arrangement. +In case there are two they are vertically placed and are either +erect and parallel or widely divergent. Even three centrals may +occur in the same vertical plane; but more usually the three or +four centrals are arranged about a center and are widely +divergent. The tubercles are apt to persist and to become naked +and corky with age. The axillary wool and the capillary radials +are also apt to be more or less persistent, thus giving the whole +plant a woolly appearance. + +3.Cactus brandegei, sp. nov. + +Cylindrical: tubercles sharply quadrangular-conical, 6 to 8 mm. +long, with densely woolly axils: radial spines about 10, slender +and rigid, whitish with dusky tips, spreading but not radiant, 7 +to 10 mm. long; central spines 3 or 4, stouter and slightly +longer, erect-spreading (sometimes slightly curved), +reddish-brown below, becoming blackish above: flowers small +(scarcely longer than the tubercle?): fruit unknown. Type in +Herb. Calif. Acad. + +San Jorge, Lower California. Fl. April. + +Specimens examined: Lower California (Brandegee of 1889, at San +Jorge). + +The species has somewhat the spine characters of C. palmeri, but +the sharply quadrangular and longer tubercles with axillary wool +free from bristles suggest a very different affinity. + +4.Cactus densispinus, sp. nov. + +Globose, 7.5 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles short, with +woolly axils: radial spines about 25, erect-spreading, slender +but rigid, yellow (brownish to black with age), unequal, 8 to 10 +mm. long; central spines 6, a little longer (10 to 12 mm.) and +straight, more rigid and darker, black-tipped: seeds obovate, +reddish-brown, 1 mm. long. Type in Herb. Coulter. + +Very easily distinguished by its dense, erect spines, which so +completely cover the plant as to give it the appearance of a +large chestnut bur. Another much smaller form, which seems to be +a variety, has stouter and longer ashy-white spines, the centrals +darker-tipped, and the lower centrals slightly curved. + +++ One short central spine (rarely two or none): ovaries +immersed: seeds small, yellow and rugulose: simple. + +5.Cactus heyderi (Muhlenpf.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria heyderi Muhlenpf. Allg. Gart. Zeit. xvi. 20(1848). + Mamillaria declivis Dietr. Allg. Gart. Zeit. xviii. 235 +(1850). + Mamillaria applanata Engelm. Pl. Lindh 198 (1850). + Mamillaria texensis Labouret, Monogr. Cact. 89 (1858). + +Depressed, globose, usually with depressed vertex, 8 to 12 cm. +broad, 2.5 to 5 cm. high: tubercles elongated: radial spines 10 +to 22, whitish, 5 to 12 mm. long, the lower usually the longer, +stouter, and often darker; central spine 4 to 8 mm. long, light +yellowish-brown, stout, straight, and porrect: flowers 2 to 2.5 +cm. long, reddish-white: fruit incurved, 1.5 to 3 cm. long. (Ill. +Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 9. figs. 4-14). Type unknown. + +From the Guadalupe River, Texas, to the mouth of the Rio Grande, +and westward to Arizona and Sonora. Fl. April, May. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Lindheimer of 1845, 1847, 1853; Wright +226, also collections of 1849, 1852, 1853, 1855, 1856; Bigelow of +1853; Trelease of 1892; Nealley of 1892): New Mexico (Wright 311; +Bigelow of 1853, Evans of 1891): Arizona (Pringle of 1881): also +growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893; and in the World's Fair +collection of Mrs. Nickels. + +The radial spines are somewhat variable in relative length, often +becoming almost equal, while sometimes the upper radials are very +much reduced. The figure referred to in Cact. Mex. Bound. is not +satisfactory as to the general habit of the plant, which is +flat-topped rather than hemispherical. + +6.Cactus heyderi hemisphaericus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria hemisphaerica Engelm. Pl. Lindh. 198 (1850). + +Differs in being hemispherical instead of flat-topped, in its +fewer (9 to 12) and shorter (4 to 8 mm.) radial spines, and much +smaller less rough and lighter-colored seeds. (Ill. Cact. Mex. +Bound. t. 9. figs. 15-17) Type, the "Goebel's Garden" plants in +Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Throughout southern Texas and southern New Mexico, and southward; +not extending so far north or west as the species, and apparently +not so abundant within the United States. Fl. May. + +Specimens examined: Texas(Schott 322, 614): New Mexico (Evans of +1891): also specimens cultivated in the Goebel Garden, St. Louis, +in 1847, brought from "below Matamoras on the Rio Grande" by the +St. Louis Volunteers, in 1816. + +On account of its convex top the variety becomes somewhat higher +than the species (5 to 7.5 cm.), and the flowers are sometimes +slightly longer (2 to 3 cm.). + +7.Cactus meiacanthus (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 +(1891). + + Mamillaria meiacantha Engelm. Syn. Cact. 263 (1856) + +Hemispherical or with depressed vertex, 7.5 to 12.5 cm. in +diameter, with a broad top-shaped base: tubercles compressed, 14 +to 18 mm. long: radial spines 5 to 9 (usually about 6), stout +and strongly subulate, 6 to 10 mm. long, straight or somewhat +curved, whitish or yellowish, the lower mostly a little longer, +the upper one sometimes wanting; central spine shorter and stout, +darker, straight, and porrect, turned upwards among the radials, +or rarely wanting: flowers 2.5 to 3 cm. long, reddish-white: +fruit incurved, 2 to 3 cm. long. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. +9, figs. 1-3). Type specimens are those of the collections of +1847, 1851, 1852, and 1853, from which the original description +was drawn and all of which are in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From the Guadalupe River, Texas, to the "Great Bend" of the Rio +Grande, westward through western Texas and New Mexico; also +northern Mexico (Hemsley); Fl. May, June. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright of 1851, 1852; Bigelow of +1853): New Mexico ("Missouri Volunteers" of 1847; unknown +collector in 1880); also specimens cultivated in St. Louis in +1853, and others growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +Dr. Engelmann regarded this species as possibly only a variety +of C. heyderi, to which it is certainly very closely allied +through var. hemisphaerica, but the different tubercles and +fewer stouter spines serve so well to distinguish it that it +seems best to retain its specific rank. + +In reference to the citation of the original description an +explanation seems necessary, which will apply to numerous similar +cases. The Pacif. R. Rep. iv. 27 (1856), Syn. Cact. 263 +(1858), and Cact. Mex. Bound. 9 (1859), have each been cited +as the original publication. The confusion has arisen from the +fact that in both the publications of 1856 the description in the +Rep. Mex. Bound. is referred to, and in that report the plant +is fully described as "sp. nov." However, the publication of +the Boundary Report was long delayed on account of the +preparation of the plates, and in the meantime both the +publications of 1856 had appeared, in each one of which the +species is distinctly characterized and reference made to the +description in the forthcoming Boundary Report. As between the +two publications of 1856 the Syn. Cact. (Proc. Amer. Acad. +iii. 259) was evidently distributed first. + +8.Cactus gummiferus (Engelm.) Kuntze. Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 +(1891). + + Mamillaria gummifera Engelm. Wisliz. Rep. 21 (1848). + +Hemispherical, 7.5 to 12.5 cm. broad and 6 to 10 cm. high: +tubercles 12 to 15 mm. long: radial spines 10 to 12, the lower +stout, with dusky apex, 12 to 15 mm. long, twice or thrice as +long as the whitish setaceous upper ones; central spine +(sometimes two) shorter (about 4 mm.), stout, dusky and porrect: +flowers 3 cm. long, reddish-white, brownish-red outside: fruit +unknown. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 9. figs. 18-20) Type +probably lost, as no specimens could be found in the Engelmann +Herbarium. + +Chihuahua, near Cosihuiriachi. + +So far as can be discovered, this species has not been collected +since the original Wislizenus collection of 1846-47. The plants +were cultivated by Dr. Engelmann and made to bloom, showing the +flowers to be larger and darker colored than in the rest of the +group, from which the species also differs in its more robust +habit, its very unequal radial spines, and the occasional +occurrence of two centrals. + + ** Central spine hooked. + +9.Cactus uncinatus (Zucc) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 (1591). + + Mamillaria uncinata Zucc. in Pfeiff. Enum. 34 (1837). + Mamillaria bihamata Pfeiff. in Otto and Deitr. Gart. vi. 274 (1840) + Mamillaria adunca Scheidw. (1845-1849?). + Mamillaria depressa Scheidw. (1845-1849?). + +Usually globose (occasionally depressed or even subcolumnar), 5 +to 6 cm. in diameter (doubtless becoming larger): tubercles 8 +to 10 mm. long, woolly in the upper axils: radial spines 4 to +6, rigid, 4 to 6 mm. long, the upper one stouter than the rest +and sometimes shorter, reddish-brown and horny, straight or +slightly curved, the remainder straight and white with dusky +tips; central spine stout and horny, reddish-brown, 7 to 10 mm. +long: flowers greenish-white or tinged with red: fruit unknown +Type unknown. + +Entirely Mexican, reported from Chihuahua to Saint Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Gregg of 1848; Parry 268; +Eschanzier of 1891): Chihuahua (Wislizenus of 1846-47; also +Chihuahua specimens cultivated in the Jacoby Garden in 1856 and +1857). + +The variations observed in this species do not seem sufficient +for the establishment of varieties. The type form seems to have +been globose, with 4 radial spines and a stout central one. The +depressed forms with 6 radials and a more slender central +represent var. spinosior Lem. (M. depressa Scheidw.); and the +subcolumnar forms with 6 radials (the upper one of which is +somewhat curved) and a stout strongly hooked central represent +var biuncinata Lem. (M. bihamata Pfeiff.) Such combinations of +characters, however, do not hold, as any one of the plant body +forms may display any one of the spine characters referred to. + +B. Tubercles terete. + + * Central spines none: mostly simple globose plants, with very + numerous straight whitish setaceous radials. + +10. Cactus lasiacanthus (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 259 +(1891). + + Mamillaria lasiacantha Engelm. Syn. Cact. 261 (1856). + +Globose or ovate globose, 2 to 2.5 cm. high and 1 to 2 cm. broad: +tubercles 4 mm. long, about 2 mm. in diameter, with naked axils: +spines 40 to 60, in many series, very unequal, 2 to 4 mm, long, +white and pilose, the upper exterior usually longer than the +rest, the innermost usually much shorter: flowers 12 mm. long, +whitish or pinkish (petals with red median band): fruit 1 to 2 +cm. long: seeds about 1 mm. long, blackish and conspicuously +pitted. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 3). Type, the specimens of +Wright in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From western Texas ("west of time Pecos, on low limestone hills, +among herbage") to Arizona and Chihuahua. Fl. April, May. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright 121, also of 1852; Parry of +1852): Arizona (Miller of 1881): Chihuahua (Pringle 213, +250,258): also specimens cultivated in St. Louis in 1852 and +1855. + +11. Cactus lasiacanthus denudatus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria lasiacantha denudata Engelm. Cact. Mex. Bound. 5 + (1859). + +Larger, 2.5 to 3.5 cm. in diameter, with longer tubercles (5 to 6 +mm.), and more numerous (50 to 80) longer (3 to 5 mum.) spines +which are naked or nearly so. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 4) +Type, Wright specimen in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From western Texas (with the species) to Coahuila. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright of 1852): Coahuila (Palmer of +1880). + +In the Syn. Cact. Dr. Engelmann merges this variety with the +species, and has been followed in this by subsequent writers, but +the characters seem so (distinctive that its varietal rank has +been restored. + +12. Cactus micromeris (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria micromeris Engelm. Syn. Cact. 260 (1856). + +With depressed top and very rarely branching, 1 to 3.5 cm. in +diameter: tubercles very small (about 1 mm. long) and wart-like, +crowded, shedding the spines with age and giving the base of the +plant a tuberculated appearance: spines from white to ashy-gray, +1 to 3 mm. long; in young plants and on lower tubercles of adult +plants about 20, equal and radiant; on flower-bearing tubercles +30 to 40, stellate-porrect in every direction, the 6 to 8 upper +ones two to four times longer than the rest (4 to 8 mm.), clavate +toward the apex and acute (the clavate top at length deciduous), +intermixed with loose wool of about the same length and forming a +small tuft on the top of the plant which includes and partly +hides flowers and fruit: flowers whitish to light pink, almost +central, very small (6 mm. in diameter), much reduced (3 to 5 +sepals, 5 petals, 10 to 15 stamens, 3 stigmas): fruit 8 to 12 mm. +long: seeds 1.5 mm. long, black and shining. (Ill. Cact. Mex. +Bound. t. 1 and 2. figs. 1-4) Type, the specimens of Wright in +Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +On naked mountain tops and sides, extreme southwestern Texas (Val +Verde County to El Paso) and southward into Coahuila and +Chihuahua. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright 227 of 1849, also of 1852; +Nealley of 1892): Coahuila (Bigelow of 1853): Chihuahua (Pringle +212): also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +The plants densely covered above with delicate ashy-gray spines +and with naked tuberculate base are readily recognized. It still +remains an open question whether the flowers are developed from +the axils of tubercles of the same season or the last ones of the +preceding season. Dr. Engelmann inclined to the latter view, as +all the other characters of the plant associate it with the +"lateral-flowered" species; and in the absence of definite +observation we have retained it there. If the nearly central +flowers indicate that they are produced from growth of the same +season the species would seem to be allied to Coryphantha, in +which group its small flowers and small tubercles would be +anomalous. + +13. Cactus micromeris greggii (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria micromeris greggii Engelm. Syn. Cact. 261 (1856). + +Larger (2.5 to 5 cm. in diameter) and becoming oblong, with +larger globose-ovate tubercles (2 to 2.5 mm. long), fewer rigid +spines all radiant (interior 5 to 7 shorter and stouter, 1 to 2 +mm. long; the outer 15 to 18, 3 to 4 mm. long), and fruit 1.5 to +2 mm. long. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 2. figs. 5-8) Type, Gregg +508 in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Mountain ridges near Saltillo, Coahuila. Said by Budd to occur +within the southern borders of Pecos County, Tex. + +Specimens examined: Coahuila (Gregg 508; Palmer of 1880). + +It is a question whether this variety does not merely represent +an older and better developed plant than those upon which the +species is based. Mr. Harry I. Budd, who has made extensive +collections of Texan and Mexican Cacti for the market, reports +that it is impossible to separate sharply the variety from the +species in the field, and regards the difference merely as one of +age. Unfortunately, only living material of the species could be +examined, but its characters seem well sustained even in the most +vigorous plants, some of which reach the size of the variety. +Through this variety the species is brought very near the +following: + +14. Cactus bispinus. + + Mamillaria microthele Muhlenpf. Allg. Gart. Zeit. p. 11 +(1848), + not Lem. (1838). + +Differs from the last form (var. greggii) chiefly in its +cespitose habit, much larger tubercles, and two unusually stout +and short central spines (fide Engelmann, who examined specimens +in Coll. Salm-Dyck). + +Credited to Mexico in general, but said by Budd to occur within +the southern border of Pecos County, Tex. + + ** Central spines present and one or more hooked. + + Mostly globose and simple plants (occasionally somewhat + cylindrical). + +15. Cactus wrightii (Engelm.) Kuntze. Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 (1891). + + Mamillaria wrightii Engelm. Syn. Cact. 262 (1856). + +Globose or depressed globose (top-shaped below), 3 to 7.5 cm. in +diameter, simple: tubercles 10 to 12 mm. long, with naked axils: +radial spines 8 to 12, white (the upper dusky-tipped), pubescent, +8 to 12 mm. long central spines mostly 2 (usually side by side +and divergent), rarely 1 or 3, scarcely longer, hooked and +reddish-black: flowers 2.5 cm. long, bright purple: fruit about +2.5 cm. long, somewhat subglobose, purple: seeds 1.4 mm long, +black and pitted. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t.8. figs. 1-8) Type, +Wright of 1851 in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +High plains and rocky places, from the Upper Pecos, east of Santa +Fe, N. Mex., southward through extreme southwestern Texas +(between the Pecos and El Paso), and into Chihuahua (near Lake +Santa Maria). + +Specimens examined: New Mexico (Wright of 1851; Rusby of 1880): +also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +Dr. Engelmann calls attention to the fact that this species is +closely allied to the Mexican C. zephranthoides (Scheidw.), but +in the absence of material representing the latter species no +comparison can be made. In descriptions of the Mexican species +the differently colored flowers and the much longer spines +suggest differences that an examination of fruit and seed +characters may still further emphasize. + +16. Cactus goodrichii (Scheer) Kuntze. Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria goodrichii Scheer in Salm Cact. Hort. Dyck. 91 + (1850). + +Globose or ovate, 5 to 7.5 cm. high, subsimple: tubercles ovate, +short (3 to 5 mm.), somewhat corky and persistent, with dense +wool in the young axils containing 5 to 8 stiff bristles: radial +spines 11 to 15 (the uppermost one sometimes wanting), white and +rigid, 5 to 7 mm. long, entangled with adjoining clusters; +central spines 3 or 4 (often solitary in young plants), +brownish-black,the upper ones divergent and straight (rarely +showing a tendency to hook), the lower longer (9 to 10 mm.), +stouter and hooked (usually upwards): flowers 12 to 18 mm, long, +the petals yellowish-white with red midribs: fruit clavate and +scarlet. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 8. figs. 9-14) Type: Scheer +says that the plant was brought from the Island of "Corros" +(Cedros?) by Dr. Goodrich, and "unfortunately perished in the +gardens," which generally means that there is not a fragment of +the type in existence. + +In dry ravines, from San Diego County, California, southward +throughout Lower California and the neighboring islands +(including Guadalupe Island). "Llavina." + +Specimens examined: California (Parry of 1850, 1875; Agassiz of +1872; Parish 450 of 1882 at Vallecito): Lower California (Gabb 18 +of 1867; Brandegee of 1889 on Magdalena Island, and 240 of 1890 +from San Jose del Cabo): also specimens cultivated in Gard. +Salm-Dyck. + +By a misprint in Cact. Mex. Bound, the specific name appeared as +"Goodridgii," and this error appears in almost every subsequent +mention of the species, even in Watson's Bibliographical Index, +although in Syn. Cact. and other references by Dr. Engelmann the +correct form appears. + +17. Cactus pondii (Greene). + + Mamillaria pondii Greene, Pittonia, i, 268 (1889). + +Oval or cylindrical, from low to 30 cm. high, simple or sparingly +branched: radial spines 20 to 30, white and slender; centrals 4 +or 5, the longest over 25 mm, long, rigid and strongly hooked, +dark brown above the middle: flowers nearly 5 cm. long, bright, +scarlet: fruit unknown. Type, Pond specimens in Herb. Greene. + +Cedros Island, off the west coast of Lower California. Fl. +February. + +Unfortunately, the type specimen has been mislaid, so that no +examination of it could be made. Evidently related to C. +goodrichii, but differing in its much more robust habit, more +numerous radials, much longer spines, and larger scarlet flowers. + +18. Cactus barbatus (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 (1891). + + Mamillaria barbata Engelm. Wisliz. Rep. 22 (1848). + +Depressed-globose, about 4 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles 8 +mm. long, with naked axils: radial spines very numerous (50 to +60), in two series, 6 to 8 mm. long, the outer (about 40) slender +but rigid and white, the inner (10 to 15) a little stouter and +yellow; usually one central spine, stout and erect, hooked +downwards, brownish: flowers 18 to 20 mm. long, rose-red: fruit +oblong, 10 to 12 mm. long, green (when mature?): seeds minute, +dark brown and lightly pitted. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound t. 6. figs. +9-12) Type, Wislizenus of 1846 in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Central Chihuahua. Fl. May, in cultivation. + +Specimens examined: Chihuahua (Wislizenus of 1846, 1850): also +specimens cultivated in Baumann's Garden in 1857, 1858; also +growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +Dr. Engelmann observed a curious intermediate character in the +origin of the flowers of this species, the first ones of the +season appearing in the axils of the last tubercles of the +preceding year, while the later ones develop from the axils of +the first tubercles of the same season. The specimen growing in +Mo. Bot. Gard, in 1893 had 3 central spines, one or two being +hooked. + +19. Cactus grahami (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria grahami Engelm. Syn. Cact. 262 (1856). + +Globose or at length ovate, 2.5 to 7.5 cm. high, simple or +branched from the base and even cespitose: tubercles ovate, 6 mm. +long, dilated at base (corky and persistent when old), with naked +axils: radial spines 15 to 30 in a single series, white, often +dusky-tipped, slender but rigid, naked or puberulent, 6 to 12 mm. +long, the shorter ones uppermost, the longer ones lateral; +central spines 1 to 3, blackish from a paler base, the lower +(often the only) one stouter and longer (6 to 18 mm.), hooked +upward, the one or two upper ones (when present) shorter and +slenderer, divergent: flowers 2 to 2.5 cm. long, rose-colored: +fruit 2 to 2.5 cm. long: seeds 0.8 to 1 mm. long, black and +pitted. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 6. figs. 1-8) Type, Wright +of 1852 and Bigelow of 1852 in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +In rocky places, from the mountains of extreme southwestern Texas +(west of the Pecos) to southern Utah, southern California (common +along the Colorado), and Sonora. Fl. June-August. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright of 1852; Newberry of 1858; G. +R. Vasey of 1881; Miller of 1881; Briggs of 1892): New Mexico +(Evans of 1891): Arizona (Bigelow of 1852; Schott of 1858; Cous +of 1865; Palmer of 1869, 1870; Engelmann of 1880; Pringle of +1884): Utah (Parry of 1874): Sonora (Schott of 1853): also +specimens cultivated in the Mo. Bot. Gard. in 1881. + +In all references to the fruit of this species it is described as +"oval and green," except in Ives Report, where Dr. Engelmann +describes its real character as the ordinary fruit of +Eumamillaria. The immature fruit is "oval and green," but with +maturity it becomes clavate and scarlet. The Utah specimens of +Parry show an exceptional character in their 30 to 33 scabrous +radial spines, but otherwise they are quite normal. M. +microcarpa Engelm., Emory's Rep. 156. f. 3, should be dropped as +a synonym of this species, at least as to figure and description. +In all probability C.grahami is one of the forms of the Mexican +C. schelhasii (Pfeiff.). Except that in C. grahami the radial +spines are apt to be more numerous and longer, and the centrals +much darker; and in C. schelhasii the 3 centrals seem to be +always present and sometimes all hooked, the descriptions suggest +no difference. In the absence of authentic specimens of the +latter species, however, and with its fruit and seed entirely +unknown, such a reference of C. grahami must be deferred. + +20. Cactus bocasanus (Poselger). + + Mamillaria bocasana Poselger, Gart. Zeit. 94 (1853). + +Depressed-globose, 2 to 3 cm. high: tubercles 8 mm. long, with +long axillary wool: radial spines 25 to 30, white and capillary, +10 to 25 mm. long; central spines 2 to 4, slender and naked (or +slightly puberulent), the most central one hooked (usually +upwards), 15 to 25 mm. long, the upper 1 to 3 shorter and +straight, all yellow with red tips, the hooked one often +brownish-red nearly to the base: flowers unknown: fruit green, +about 4 mm. long: seeds cinnamon-brown, oblique, broadly obovate, +with narrowly ovate basal hilum. Type unknown. + +San Luis Potosi, so far as known. Poselger says, "Texas, auf der +Seira de Bocas, among rocks," which station we have been unable +to locate. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891): also +specimens cultivated in Hort. Pfersdorff in 1869; in Mo. Bot. +Gard. in 1891; also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +The capillary radials give the plant a white-woolly appearance. +The younger spines at the vertex are erect and tufted. It +resembles C. grahami, but the tubercles are much more slender and +not thickened at base, all the spines are more slender, the +central hooked one is more reddish, and the fruit is much +shorter. + +21. Cactus eschanzieri, sp. nov. + +Depressed-globose, 3 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles broader +at base, 6 to 8 mm. long, with naked axils: spines all pubescent; +radials 15 to 20, with dusky tips, the lateral 10 to 12 mm. long, +the lower weaker, shorter and curved, the upper shorter; solitary +central spine reddish, slender, somewhat twisted, usually hooked +upwards, 15 to 25 mm. long: flowers red (?): fruit reddish (?), +ovate, about 10 mm, long: seeds reddish, oblique-obovate, 1.2 mm. +long, pitted, with subventral hilum. Type in Herb. Coulter. + +San Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891). + +Resembles C. grahami, but with fewer and more slender pubescent +spines, longer and less rigid central, more exserted fruit, and +much larger reddish and strongly pitted seeds with subventral +hilum. + +22. Cactus tetrancistrus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria tetrancistra Engelm. Am. Jour. Sci. II. xiv. 337 + (1852), in part. + Mamillaria phellosperma Engelm. Syn. Cact. 262 (1856). + Cactus pellospermus Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 (1891). + +Ovate or ovate-cylindrical, 5 to 25 cm. high, 3.5 to 7.5 cm. in +diameter, simple or rarely branching at base: tubercles +ovate-cylindrical, 8 to 14 mm. long, with axillary +bristle-bearing wool, at length naked: radial spines 30 to 60, in +two series, the exterior bristle-like, shorter and white, the +interior stouter, longer and dusky-tipped or purplish; central +spines 3 or 4, stouter, longer, brown or blackish from a paler +base, the upper 2 or 3 (10 to 14 mm. long) straight, or one or +two or even all hooked, the lower stouter and longer (12 to 18 +mm.), hooked upwards: flowers about 2.5 cm. long: fruit 1 to 2.5 +cm. long: seeds large (1.2 to 1.5 mm. in diameter), globose and +wrinkled, partly immersed in a brown spongy or corky cup-shaped +3-lobed appendage. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 7) Type, Parry of +1850, but modified by Le Conte 14 and Bigelow of 1854, all in +Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Gravelly soil and sandy stream-banks, from the eastern slopes of +the mountains of southern California, throughout western Arizona +and southern Nevada to southern Utah; referred also to "N. W. +Mexico" by Hemsley (Biol. Centr.-Amer.). + +Specimens examined: California (Parry of 1850; Newberry of 1858; +Parish of 1882): Arizona (Le Conte 14; Bigelow of 1854; Dr. Loew +of 1875: also Palmer of 1870, but with no locality. + +In the original description this species was confounded with C. +grahami, with which it grows and which it much resembles; and +this, together with the fact that 4 central hooked spines are +seldom found, induced Dr. Engelmann (Syn. Cact. 262) to propose +the more appropriate but untenable name M. phellosperma. The +resemblance to C. grahami is not so close as general appearance +would indicate, as the more oblong or cylindrical form, longer +and less crowded tubercles, more numerous spines, often more than +one hooked central, large seeds, and remarkable seed appendages +serve well to distinguish it. + +++ Plants with fasciculate slender cylindrical stems (30 to 45 + cm. high, and 2.5 to 6 cm. in diameter): Lower Californian. + +23. Cactus roseanus (Brandegee). + + Mamillaria longihamata Engelm. Mss. + Mamillaria roseana Brandegee, Zoe, ii. 19 (1891). + +Fasciculately branched at base, the stems 30 to 45 cm. long +(sometimes pendent from rocks and as much as 200 cm. long) and +2.5 to 5 cm. in diameter, the whole plant glaucous: tubercles +elongated-conical, ascending, 10 to 12 mm. long, with woolly +axils: radial spines 7 to 10, straight, rigid and sharp, 9 to 15 +mm. long, dark reddish when young, becoming ashy, the upper ones +the longer; the solitary central much longer (20 to 30 mm.), +almost black below and with reddish tip, becoming ashy with age, +usually hooked downwards: flowers numerous, 2.5 to 3.5 cm. long, +bright scarlet: fruit obovate to globose, scarlet, 6 to 9 mm. in +diameter, fleshy: seeds black and pitted. Type in Herb. Calif. +Acad. + +Apparently common at low elevations throughout southern Lower +California, especially the eastern side. + +Specimens examined: Lower California (W. M. Gabb 17 of 1867, near +Loreto; Brandegee of 1889, at San Gregorio; Palmer 139 of 1890, +near La Paz; Palmer 880 of 1890, on Carmen Island; Brandegee 241 +of 1890, at Rancho Colorado). + +One of the most showy species of Lower California. The plant has +the appearance of a Coryphanth, and is remarkable for its tall +and slender habit, its large central hooks, and its globose +fruit. Since 1867 this species has been in Herb. Engelmann, +fully characterized as above under the very appropriate specific +name longihamatus. + +24. Cactus setispinus, sp. nov. + + Mamillaria Setispina Engelm. Mss. + +Fasciculate and ascending, simple or branched at base, the stems +about 30 cm. high and 3 to 6 cm. in diameter, densely covered +with remarkably long stout spines: tubercles short and broadly +conical, with axillary wool: spines white. with black tips; +radials 10 to 12, widely spreading, very unequal, 10 to 34 mm. +long, slender and flexuous; central spines 1 to 4, more rigid and +much longer (20 to 50 mm.), the upper ones straight, the lowest +one longest and hooked (usually upwards) and often variously +curved and twisted: fruit obovate and scarlet 30 mm. long: seeds, +black and pitted. Type, Gabb 15 in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Rocky or gravelly soil, San Julio Canyon. and in the vicinity of +San Borgia, Lower California. + +Specimens examined: Lower California (W. M. Gabb 15 of 1867, at +San Borgia; Brandegee of 1889, from San Borgia and San Julio +Canyon). + +In his notes Mr. Gabb describes the flower as "large, 3 to 3.5 +inches long, bell-shaped, of a beautiful purplish red color," +concerning which Dr. Engelmann remarks "this would indicate a +Coryphanth, but the tubercles show no trace of a groove, and, +moreover, a withered remnant of a flower laterally attached (say +18 to 20 mm. long), so that I have no doubt that Mr. Gabb's +statement is founded on some error." It is very probable that +the flowers are scarlet and larger than Dr. Engelmann suggests. +The species is closely allied to C. roseanus, but differs in its +shorter tubercles and much longer spines. About a dozen stems +rise in a clump, about a foot high, covering an area of 2 or 3 +feet. These two species represent a very distinct Lower +Californian group of cylindrical and hooked Eumamillarias. Both +probably have showy scarlet flowers and may attain considerable +length when growing upon rock ledges so as to become pendent. +The specimens of C. setispinus from San Julio Canyon are from +younger parts and show but a single long and hooked central. The +San Borgia specimens show mostly 3 or 4 centrals, the lowest one +hooked and becoming remarkably long and often variously twisted +and curved. However, I can discover no difference except such as +may be due to age. + + ++ Central spines present and not hooked. + + Central spines more than one, longer than the radials, which + are numerous, white and slender (capillary or bristle-like) + (rigid in C. Halei). + +25. Cactus halei (Brandegee). + + Mamillaria halei Brandegee, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci Scr. 2. ii. + 161 (1889). + +Stems cylindrical, 8 to 10 in a clump, about 30 cm. high and 5 to +7.5 cm. in diameter: tubercles short, with axillary wool: radial +spines 10 to 22, rigid and erect-spreading, unequal, 6 to 15 mm. +long; central spines numerous and erect-spreading, 1 to 3 of them +very stout and prominent (25 to 35 mm. long); all the spines +straight, at first reddish-brown, becoming yellowish and ashy, +more or less dark-tipped: flowers 2.5 cm. long, bright scarlet +(almost throughout): fruit 12 mm, long, clavate and red: seeds +black and pitted. (Ill. l. c. t. 6) Type in Herb. Calif. Acad. + +Abundant on Magdalena and Santa Margarita Islands, western coast +of Lower California. Fl. January. + +Specimens examined: Lower California (Brandegee of 1889, on +Magdalena Island). + +The tubercles are so close together that the plant appears +thickly covered with the unusually stout and erect-spreading +straight spines, a few of the centrals being specially prominent. +The plant is more slender than the ordinary "cylindrical" +members of the genus, but stouter than the slender hooked forms +of the preceding section. + +26. Cactus rhodanthus (Link & Otto) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 + (1891). + + Mamillaria rhodantha Link & Otto, Icon. t. 26 (1828-31) + Mamillaria lanifera Haw. Phil. Mag. lxiii., 41 (), not + Salm-Dyck (1850). + +Oblong or subcylindric, 30 cm. or more high, 7.5 to 10 cm. in +diameter, often forking from the middle: tubercles conical, 12 +mm. long, 8 mm. in diameter, with woolly axils: radial spines 16 +to 20, bristle-like, white, the lower longer (8 to 10 mm.); +central spines 6 or 7, rigid, whitish with black tip, 12 mm. +long: flowers rose color, 12 mm. in diameter: fruit 2.5 cm. long, +cylindrical. (Ill. l. c.) Type unknown. + +Referred to Mexico in general, but reported as yet from San Luis +Potosi to southern Mexico. Fl. profusely all summer. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Bourgeau 47; Pringle 3679; +Eschanzier of 1891): also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +The specimens of Bourgeau and Pringle have somewhat larger spines +than the type, as indicated by the description. + +27. Cactus rhodanthus sulphureospinus. + + Mamillaria sulphurea Forst. Handb. Cact. (1846), not Cactus + sulphureus Gill, (1830). + Mamillaria rhodantha sulphurea Salm, Hurt. Cact. Dyck. 11 +(1850). + +Central spines sulphur-yellow; otherwise like the species. Type +unknown. + +San Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Pfeiffer, with no number or +date; Eschanzier of 1891). + +The varietal distinction maintained seems a small one, but it is +constant and striking, so far as can be discovered. + +28. Cactus capillaris. + + Mamillaria lanifera Salm, Cact. Hort. Dyck. 98 (1850), not +Haw. + Cactus laniferus Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 250 (1891). + +Cylindrical and erect: tubercles crowded, conical, glaucous, with +axillary bristles: radial spines capillary and very numerous, +white and crisped, entirely covering the plant; central spines 4 +to 6, rigid, straight and spreading, straw-colored, 8 to 12 mm. +long: flowers equaling the tubercles, the yellow petals striped +with red: fruit unknown. Type unknown. + +Referred to Mexico in general, but definitely known only from +Coahuila. + +Specimens examined: Coahuila. (Palmer of 1880). + +There is a confusion of synonymy between this species and C. +rhodanthus, both having been named Mamillaria lanifera. The +earlier M. lanifera of Haworth, however, is clearly M. rhodantha +of Link & Otto; and although Prince Salm-Dyck revived the name +for the present species, the law of homonyms will not permit it +to stand. The name proposed refers to the abundant display of +capillary radial spines, which is probably the most notable +feature. + +29. Cactus palmeri, sp. nov. + +Cylindrical: tubercles crowded, glaucous, cylindrical (somewhat +broadest above), about 4 mm. long, with dense axillary wool +containing bristles: radial spines 25 to 30, very slender and +white but rigid, about 5 mm. long, spreading or somewhat radiant, +entangled with those of neighboring tubercles, and so covering +the whole plant; central spines 3 to 5 (usually 4), more robust, +erect or slightly divergent, brownish with darker tip, 7 to 8 mm. +long: flowers small: fruit clavate and scarlet: seeds black and +strongly pitted, 0.5 to 0.8 mm. in diameter. Type, Palmer 921 in +U. S. Nat. Herb. + +San Benito Island, off the west coast of lower California. + +Specimens examined: Lower California, San Benito Island (Palmer +921 of 1889, reported as Mamillaria Goodrichii). + +Very closely allied to C. capillaris of eastern Mexico. + +30. Cactus stellatus Willd. Enum. Suppl. 30 (1813). + + Cactus pusillus DC. Cat. Hort. Monsp. 184 (1813), not Haw. + (1803). + Mamillaria pusilla DC. Prod. iii. 459 (1828). + +A very common West Indian species, apparently differing from the +variety only in the very much fewer (12 to 20) radial spines, +although numerous specimens, both dried and living, were examined +for additional characters. This difference, however, is so +constant and striking that, taken together with the wide +geographical separation, it should stand as varietal. + +31. Cactus stellatus texanus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria pusilla texana Engelm. Syn. Cact. 216 (1856). + Mamillaria texana Young, Fl. Texas, 279 (1873). + +Ovate-globose, 2.5 to 3 cm. in diameter, 2.5 to 6 cm. high, +proliferous and at length cespitose: tubercles 7 to 9 mm. long, +the long axillary wool intermixed with several coarse twisted +bristles: radial spines very numerous, in many series, the outer +ones (30 to 50) capillary, white, elongated and flexuous or +crisped (12 to 16 mm, long when straightened), the inner ones (10 +to 12) more rigid, shorter (6 to 8 mm.), puberulent, whitish or +yellowish, usually dark-tipped; central spines 5 to 8, rigid, +straight, pubescent, unequal, white below and reddish or dark +above: flowers 1.5 to 2 cm. long, the yellowish-white petals with +reddish median band: fruit 1.5 to 2 cm. long: seeds black and +shining, conspicuously pitted, 1.2 mm. long. (Ill. Cact. Mex. +Bound. t 5.) Type, Bigelow specimens in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From the mouth of the Rio Grande to El Paso, Tex., and southward +into Coahuila and Chihuahua. Fl. March-May. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Bigelow of 1853; Nealley of 1892): +Coahuila (Bigelow of 1853): also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1892 +and 1893. + +The exterior capillary spines cover the whole plant as with a +coarse wool. + +32. Cactus pringlei, sp. nov. + +Globose (?), 5 cm. in diameter: tubercles short-conical, about 6 +mm. long, with very woolly axils: radial spines 18 to 20, +setaceous-bristly and radiant, 5 to 8 m in. long; central spines +5 to 7 (usually 6), stout and horny, more or less recurved, +spreading, 20 to 25 mm. long; all straw-colored, but the centrals +darker: flowers deep red (darker, even brownish, outside), 8 to +10 mm. long: fruit unknown. Type, Pringle of 1891 in Herb. Gray. + +San Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Pringle of 1891). + +Evidently a member of the Chrysacantha group and near C. +rhodanthus sulphureospinus, but differs in the much shorter +tubercles, straw-colored spines, shorter radials, much longer +centrals, and smaller darker flowers. + +33. Cactus sphaerotrichus (Lem.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 + (1891). + + Mamillaria sphaerotricha Lem. Cact. 33 (1839). + +Depressed-globose: tubercles cylindrical, obtuse, with some +axillary bristles: radial spines very much crowded, exceedingly +numerous, radiant, very slender and bristle-like, white; central +spines 6 to 10 and even more, erect and more rigid: flowers pale +reddish: fruit unknown. Type unknown. + +Referred to Mexico in general, but reported only from San Luis +Potosi. + +Specimens examined: Mexican specimens from Hort. Dyck in 1857; +from Hort. Pfersdorff in 1869; and growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893 +(from material sent by Pringle from San Luis Potosi). + + ++ The single central spine shorter than the radials (in C. + longimamma centrals often more than one and somewhat +longer). + +34. Cactus gabbli, sp. nov. + + Mamillaria gabbii Engelm Mss. + +Globose, 5 to 10 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles cylindrical, +slender, 12 to 14 mm. long, with woolly axils: radial spines +about 13, 5 to 8 mm. long, lower ones longer and stouter, +especially the lateral ones pectinate; the central shorter, +straight, and robust: flowers small, yellowish-red: fruit +unknown. Type in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Among rocks, from San Ignacio to Mission San Fernando, Lower +California, and "perhaps farther north in the interior." + +Specimens examined: Lower California (W. M. Gabb 19 of 1867). + +35. Cactus sphaericus (Dietr.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen Pl. 261 (1891). + + Mamillaria sphaerica Dietr. Allg. Gart. Zeit xxi. 94 (1853). + +Obovate or clavate, 5 cm. or more high, proliferous and at length +densely cespitose: tubercles elongated-ovate, acutish, 12 to 10 +mm. long with axillary wool: radial spines 12 to 14, setaceous, 7 +to 9 mm. long, bulbous at base, straight or curved, white; +central spine straight, subulate, somewhat shorter, but scarcely +stouter: flowers yellow, 3.5 to 5 cm. long: fruit unknown. Type +unknown. + +Sandy ridges in the valley of the Rio Grande (both sides of the +river), from the mouth to Eagle Pass. Fl. from March throughout +the season. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Schott of 1852): also specimens +cultivated in St. Louis in 1845 and 1861. + +Dietrich's description was taken from plants collected by +Poselger at Corpus Christi. The Schott specimens are from Eagle +Pass. Dr. Engelmann calls attention to the fact that this +species approaches Coryphantha in its exserted ovary and large +flower, but the flowers are clearly from the growth of the +preceding season. The species is said to be too near the Mexican +C. longimamma of central and southern Mexico, but in the absence +of type specimens of either the question can not be settled. The +usual characterization of C. longimamma is as follows, which +seems to make it distinct enough: + +36. Cactus longimamma (DC.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria longimamma DC. Rev. Cact. 113 (1829). + +Ovate or at length cylindrical, simple or cespitose: tubercles +oblong-ovate, large at base, 4 to 5 cm. long: radial spines 7 or +8, radiant and equal, 8 to 10 mm. long or more, more or less +pubescent; central spines 1 to 3, somewhat longer and spreading: +flower 4 cm. long, becoming 6 cm. broad when fully expanded, +yellow. (Ill. DC. Mem. Cact. t. 5.) + +II. CORYPHANTHA. Flowers from the base of a groove on young or +nascent tubercles (hence appearing terminal), mostly large: +spines never hooked (except in the doubtful C. brunneus). + + * Flowers yellow. + + The originally central flowers pushed aside by the continuous + development of new tubercles: usually a single prominent + central spine. + +37. Cactus missouriensis (Sweet) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 259 + (1891). + + Cactus mamillaris Nutt. Gen. i. 295 (1818), not Linn. (1753). + Mamillaria missouriensis Sweet, Hort. Brit. 171 (1827). + Mamillaria simplex Torr. & Gray, Fl. N. Am. i. 553 (1840). + Mamillaria nuttallii Engelm. Pl. Fendl. 49 (1849). + Mamillaria notesteinii Britton, Bull. Torr. Bot. Club, xviii, + 367 (1891). + +Globose, 3.5 cm. in diameter, simple or nearly so: tubercles +ovate-cylindrical, 12 to 14 mm. long, slightly grooved: radial +spines 13 to 17, straight, whitish, setaceous, somewhat unequal, +8 to 10 mm. long; central spine more robust, straight and +porrect, puberulent, 10 to 12 mm. long, often wanting: flowers +about 2.5 cm. long, yellow or reddish: stigmas 2 to 5: fruit +globose, scarlet, 6 to 8 mm. in diameter: seeds globose, black +and pitted, 0.8 to 1.1 mm. in diameter. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. +t. 74., f. 6, seeds.) Type unknown. + +High prairies of the Upper Missouri, from Montana to South Dakota +and southward through western Nebraska to western Kansas and the +eastern slopes of the mountains of Colorado. Fl. May. + +Specimens examined: Montana (Notestein of 1893): National Park +(Tweedy 423): South Dakota, (collector unknown, in 1847, 1848, +1853): Nebraska (Hayden of 1855). + +38. Cactus missouriensis similis (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria similis Engelm. Pl. Lindh. 246 (1845). + Mamillaria nuttallii caespitosa Engelm. Syn. Cact. 265 (1856). + + Mamillaria missouriensis caespitosa Watson, Bibl. Index, + 403 (1878). + +Cespitose, with 12 to 15 puberulent radial spines, the central +very often wanting, larger flowers (2.5 to 5 cm. long), fruit and +seeds (1.6 to 2.2 mm. in diameter), and 5 stigmas. (Ill. Cact. +Mex. Bound. t. 74. f 7, seeds) Type, Lindheimer, of 1845 (?) in +Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From the Kansas River, Kansas, and eastern Colorado, southward +through Oklahoma to the San Antonio River, Texas. + +Specimens examined: Colorado (Greene of 1870): Kansas (Carleton +551 of 1891, from Kingman County, distributed as Mamillaria +dasyacantha): Oklahoma (Carleton 120 of 1891): Texas (Lindheimer +of 1845, 1850; Wright of 1850; Reverchon 725): also specimens +cultivated in Goebel's Garden in 1846; and in St. Louis in 1846, +1847, 1851. + +The cespitose masses are often a foot broad. + +39. Cactus missouriensis robustior (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria similis robustior Engelm. Pl. Lindh. 200 (1850). + Mamillaria nuttallii robustior Engelm. and Bigel. Pacif. R. + Rep. iv. 28 (1856). + Mamillaria missouriensis robustior Watson, Bibl. Index, + 440 (1878). + +Almost simple, with longer aid looser tubercles, 10 to 12 stouter +radial spines (6 to 16 mm. long), a single stout central, larger +flowers, and 7 or 8 stigmas. Type, Lindheimer of 1845 in Herb. +Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From southeastern Colorado and the Canadian River (Oklahoma and +Indian Territory), to the Colorado River of Texas. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Lindheimer of 1845, 1846; Bigelow of +1853): also specimens cultivated in St. Louis in 1847. + +In Bigelow's specimens the central spine is mostly lacking. + +40. Cactus scheerii (Muhlenpf.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 +(1891). + + Mamillaria scheerii Muhlenpf. Allg. Gart. Zeit. xv. 97 (1847). + Mamillaria scheerii valida Engelm. Syn. Cact. 265 (1856). + +Ovate-globose, 7.5 to 17.5 cm. high, 7.5 to 12.5 cm. in diameter, +simple or sparingly proliferous at base: tubercles large (2.5 to +3.5 cm. long), from a broad base and suddenly contracted and +almost cylindric (10 to 14 mm. in diameter), deeply grooved (1 to +5 orbicular glands in the groove), distant, spreading and +ascending, the lower ones shorter, more conical and somewhat +imbricated, with broad axils and the younger densely woolly: +radial spines 6 to 16, straight or slightly curved, stout, rigid, +bulbous at base, whitish or yellowish (sometimes reddish) with +dark tip, the 2 to 5 lower and lateral ones stouter and +compressed (18 to 30 mm. long), the 4 to 11 upper ones weaker and +terete (10 to 20 mm. long); central spines 1 to 5, stout and +angled, 20 to 36 mm. long,,mostly yellow (sometimes reddish), a +single one very stout and porrect: flowers 5 cm. long, yellow +(sometimes reddish tinged): fruit ovate or subglobose, green: +seeds large (3 mm. long), flat and obovate, red. Type unknown; +that of the old var. valida is the Wright material in Herb. Mo. +Bot. Gard. + +Sandy ridges, southwestern Texas, from Eagle Pass and head of +the Limpia to El Paso, and southward into Chihuahua, Coahuila, +and San Luis Potosi; also southern Mexico (fide Hemsley). Fl. +July. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright 416, 478, of 1851, 1852; Evans +of 1891): San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891). + +The var. valida was described by Dr. Engelmann without having +seen C. scheerii, the only knowledge of that species being +obtained from the description of Prince Salm-Dyck in Cact. Hort. +Dyck., which seemed to indicate a smaller form, with fewer spines +than the Texan form. However, when visiting the collections of +Prince Salm-Dyck, Dr. Engelmann found original specimens of C. +scheerii which were exactly his var. valida. So far as +collections show the Texan form seems to be more robust than the +Mexican, but the material is too scanty to justify such a +generalization. Dr. Engelmann speaks of this species as "a +stately plant, by far the largest, of the northern Mamillariae" +Its tubercles are bright green and in beautiful contrast with the +showy yellow spines. + +41. Cactus robustispinus (Schott) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 + (1891). + + Mamillaria robustispina Schott in Engelm. Syn. Cact. 265 +(1856). + +A large stout plant, simple or cespitose: tubercles large, +subterete, nearly 2.5 cm. long (and about the same distance from +each other): radial spines 12 to 15, stout and rigid, 18 to 30 +mm. long, the lower ones the stouter, more dusky, straight or +often curved downwards, the upper straight and fascicled; the +solitary central spine stout, compressed, curved downwards +(occasionally an additional straighter upper one), not much +longer than the radials, the base nearly 2 mm. wide; all the +spines horny and black-tipped; flowers 3.5 to 5 cm. long with +very slender and constricted tube, saffron-yellow: fruit green +seeds large (3 to 3.2 mm, long and 2 mm. in diameter), obliquely +obovate and curved, smooth and brownish. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. +t. 74. fig. 8, seeds) Type, Schott specimens in Herb. Mo. Bot. +Gard. + +"On grassy prairies on the south side of the Babuquibari +Mountains," Sonora. Fl. July. + +Specimens examined: Sonora (Schott of 1853-4). + +Dr. Engelmann remarks that the seeds of this species are larger +than those of any other Mamillaria known to him. + +42. Cactus recurvatus (Engelm.) Kuntze Rev. Gen. Pl. 259 (1891). + + Mamillaria recurvispina Engelm. Syn. Cact. 265 (1856), not + Vries. + Mamillaria recurvata Engelm. Trans. St. Louis Acad. ii. + 202 (1863). + +Globose or depressed-globose, 7.5 to 20 cm. in diameter, simple: +tubercles ovate, deeply grooved, crowded, somewhat imbricate, 10 +to 12 mm. long: radial spines 12 to 20, bulbous at base, +compressed, rigid, recurved or flexuous, 8 to 18 mm. long, +whitish or horny, interwoven with adjacent clusters; central +spine solitary (sometimes an additional upper one), stouter and +longer (12 to 20 mm.), dark, mostly strongly recurved and +appressed (rarely straightish): flowers about 3.5 cm. long, +yellow (brownish-tinged outside): fruit unknown. Type, Schott +specimens in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From Sonora to southern Mexico. Fl. June-August. + +Specimens examined: Sonora (Schott of 1855). + +43. Cactus salm-dyckianus (Scheer) Kuntze. Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 + (1891). + + Mamillaria salm-dyckiana Scheer in Salm, Cact. Hort. Dyck. 134 + (1850). + +Subglobose: tubercles very broad and retuse, almost 2-parted by +the tomentose groove, with axillary floccose wool: radial spines +7 or 8, very rigid, widely radiant, somewhat curved, 3 to 3.5 cm. +long, in older tubercles 3 to 6 additional slender and straight +or twisted spines; the solitary central spine very stout, erect, +almost 5 cm. long: flowers and fruit unknown. Type: Scheer says +that this plant, brought from Chihuahua by Potts, "unfortunately +perished," and the description was drawn from fragments, which in +those days were not apt to be preserved. + +Chihuahua. + +Specimens examined: Chihuahua ("Salm of 1857 "). + +The specimen referred to is in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard., and reveals +no additional characters; nor can the label be interpreted, +except that it indicates that the specimen is from plants +cultivated successfully in the gardens of Prince Salm-Dyck. + + ++ Flower and fruit remaining central in the very woolly vertex + of the plant. + ++ Central spine solitary or wanting. + +44. Cactus compactus (Engelm.) Kuntze Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria compacta Engelm. Wisliz. Rep. 21 (1848). + +Depressed-globose, 5 to 10 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles +short-conical, crowded, 8 mm. long: radial spines 13 to 16, +rigid, recurved and appressed, interwoven with adjacent clusters, +whitish or horny, 10 to 20 mm. long; the erect central spine +often wanting: flowers 3 to 3.5 cm. long and broad, yellow +(brownish without): fruit oval, green: seeds 1.4 mm. long, smooth +and yellow. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 74. fig. 2, seeds) Type, +Wislizenus of 1846 in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Mountains of Chihuahua. Fl. June-July. + +Specimens examined: Chihuahua (Wislizenus of 1846): also +specimens cultivated in St. Louis in 1848, 1850, 1854. + +45. Cactus radians. (DC.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 (1891). + + Mamillaria radians DC. Rev. Cact. 111 (1829). + Mamillaria pectinata Engelm Syn. Cact. 266 (1856). + +Globose, 3.5 to 7.5 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles conical, +from a 4-angled base, lower ones short (4 to 6 mm.), upper +flower-bearing ones longer (10 to 12 mm.), terete and grooved: +radial spines 16 to 24, somewhat recurved from a bulbous +compressed base, stiff and pectinate, horny or whitish (at length +ashy), interwoven with adjacent clusters, those on lower +tubercles about equal (6 to 10 mm.), on flower-bearing tubercles +elongated, mixed with a few stouter ones and fasciculated (lower +ones 10 to 12 mm. long, upper ones 12 to 18 mm. long and forming +an apical tuft); centrals none: flowers over 5 cm. long and about +6 to 7.5 cm. in diameter when expanded, bright sulphur-yellow: +fruit ovate and green, about 12 mm. long: seeds compressed, +brownish smooth and shining, 1.8 mm. long. (Ill. Cact. Mex. +Bound. t. 11) Type unknown; that of M. pectinata Engelm. is the +Wright material in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Extending from the hills along the Lower Pecos to El Paso, +southwestern Texas, southward through Coahuila and San Luis +Potosi to southern Mexico. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright 226 of 1849, also of 1852; +Evans of 1891): Coahuila (Palmer of 1880; Mrs. Nickels): San Luis +Potosi (Parry & Palmer 265; Eschanzier of 1891): also specimens +cultivated in St. Louis in 1853; in Mo. Bot. Gard. in 1892; and +in Harv. Bot Gard. + +Even in the absence of the type I have ventured to refer +Mamillaria pectinata Engelm. to this species. Dr. Engelmann had +concluded that the two were "not sufficiently distinct," and the +examination of Mexican forms which pass as C. radians abundantly +confirms this conclusion. Besides, every character in the +original description of C. radians applies exactly to these +Mexican plants and to our Texan specimens as well. Aside from +the fact that the Mexican specimens are apt to be more robust, I +can discover no difference whatever. For discussion of +relationships see under C. scolymoides. + +46. Cactus radians pectenoides, var. nov. + +Differs in its cespitose habit, fewer (16 or 17) and stouter +spines (8 to 9 mm. long), and its larger and longer (10 mm.) less +deeply grooved tubercles. Type in Herb. Coulter. + +San Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891). + +47. Cactus corniferus (DC.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria cornifera DC. Rev. Cact. 111 (1829). + Mamillaria impexicoma Lem. Hort. Monov. Cult. 5 (1839). + Mamillaria cornifera impexicoma Salm. Cact. Hort. Dyck. + 20 (1850). + +Globose, 7.5 cm. in diameter, simple: tubercles oblong-ovate, 2 +cm long, crowded, the younger axils woolly: radial spines 15 to +26, rigid and horny, curved or sometimes straight, reflexed, +bulbous at base, yellowish (whiter with age) and with dark tips, +very sharp, 10 to 12 mm, long; the central one much stouter, +darker, slightly deflexed, 12 to 16 mm long, sometimes wanting: +flower unknown: fruit obovate, red, 2 cm long: seeds reddish, +angular, smooth, 2 mm. long. Type unknown. + +From San Luis Potosi to southern Mexico. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Parry of 1879; Eschanzier of +1891): also specimens cultivated in Mo. Bot. Gard. in 1892; +growing in same garden in 1893. Mamillaria impexicoma Lem., +afterwards reduced to a variety, was based upon fewer radial +spines and no central. As the central is occasionally wanting in +connection with the most numerous radials, and present with the +fewest, such a form would have to be separated solely on the +absence of the central spine, and even in the original +description of impexicoma the central spine is only said to be +"sometimes wanting." It has been impossible for me to separate +the forms. It should be said that the fruit and seed characters +given above were taken front a specimen whose few radials and no +centrals would undoubtedly refer it to impexicoma. As yet we are +ignorant of the flower of C. corniferus. For discussion of +relationships see under C. scolymoides. + + ++ Central spines 1 to 4. + +48. Cactus scolymoides (Scheidw.) Kuntze. Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 +(1891). + + Mamillaria scolymoides Scheidw Allg. Gart. Zeit. ix. 44 +(1841). + +Globose or ovate, 5 to 7.5 cm. high. subsimple: tubercles +conical, 10 to 16 mm. long, the upper elongated, incurved and +imbricate: radial spines 14 to 20, straight or often recurved, +white or horny, 10 to 20 mm. long (the upper the longer); central +spines 1 to 4, longer (18 to 32 mm.), more dusky, curved, the +upper ones turned upwards and intermixed with the radials, the +lower one stouter, longer, and curved downwards: flowers 5 cm. +long: fruit unknown. Type unknown. + +From the Pecos River, western Texas, westward into southern New +Mexico, and southward into Chihuahua and San Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Hays of 1858): New Mexico (Bigelow of +1853): Chihuahua (Wislizenus of 1846): also specimens cultivated +in St. Louis in 1858. + +Specimens collected by Mrs. Anna B Nickels across the Rio Grande +from Laredo, Texas, and showing neither flower nor fruit, seem to +intergrade between C. scolymoides and C. scolymoides sulcatus. +The habit is that of the former, the tubercles are those of the +latter, while the spines are somewhat different from either. The +number of central spines in these specimens is very hard to +determine, as on the adult tubercle they all assume a radial +position. The usual adult arrangement is an apparent absence of +central spines; 10 to 12 rigid, spreading and more or less +recurved radials (increasing in length from the lowest), which +are mostly white or the upper more or less dusky; and above, just +behind the radial row, 2 or 3 stout recurved-ascending spines, +which are white with tips more or less reddish-black, one of the +spines usually much stouter and longer than the others. This +form may represent a distinct species, but it seems very unsafe +to add species to the C. scolymoides group without the fullest +information. + +Prince Salm-Dyck refers C. scolymoides to "M. daimonoceras Lem. +Cact. gen. nov., p. 5," but no mention of such a name can be +found in the work referred to. Labouret refers C. corniferus to +the same name and reference. If "M. daimonoceras" was anything +more than a garden or herbarium name used by Lemaire I have been +unable to find it, and Dr. Engelmann's notes indicate that his +search met with the same result. It is possible that the name +was applied loosely to this assemblage of closely related forms +that seem to cluster about C. corniferus. + +A most perplexing question of relationship is presented by the +forms that have been called pectinatus, scolymoides, sulcatus +(calcaratus), Echinus, and the Mexican forms radians, +impexicomus, corniferus. It may be that they are all merely +varieties of one strong polymorphic type, but our knowledge of +corniferus is so incomplete, and material of other forms is so +scanty, that I can not venture to make such an assertion. +However, it seems probable that radians, pectinatus, scolymoides, +sulcatus and Echinus all have green fruit, while in impexicomus +and corniferus it is red. It has also seemed proper to merge +radians and pectinatus, also impexicomus and corniferus, and to +refer sulcatus to scolymoides as a variety. These seven forms +are thus reduced at least to four species. + +49. Cactus scolymoides sulcatus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria sulcata Engelm. Pl. Lindh. 246 (1845), not Pfeiff. + (1848). + Mamillaria strobiliformis Muhlenpf. Allg. Gart. Zeit. xvi. 19 + (1848), not Scheer (1850). + Mamillaria calcarata Engelm. Pl. Lindh. 195 (1850). + Cactus calcaratus Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 259 (1891). + +Differs in its smaller size; proliferous and much more cespitose +habit, the dilated base of the more spreading tubercles, fewer (8 +to 12) radial spines, usually a single central spine (wanting in +young plants) and somewhat larger flowers. (Ill. Cact. Mex. +Bound. t. 74. fig. 1, seeds) Type, Lindheimer of 1844 in Herb. +Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Texas, from the Brazos to the Nueces. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Lindheimer of 1844; Fendler 34; Wright +of 1850, 1854, 1857): also specimens cultivated in St. Louis in +1845, 1848, 1853, 1859. + +This seems to represent the northeastern extension of the +species, and doubtless it will be found merging into it south and +west of the Nueces. Curiously enough one of the prominent +distinctions originally given was the single central spine, while +in the type specimen there occur tubercles with more than one +central. + +50. Cactus echinus (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria echinus Engelm. Syn. Cact. 267 (1856). + +Globose or subconical, 3.5 to 6.5 cm. in diameter, simple: +tubercles terete, conical, grooved above, 10 to 12 mm. long: +radial spines 16 to 30, pectinate, straight or little curved, +rigid and appressed (interwoven with neighboring clusters), +ashy-white (often dusky at apex), 8 to 12 mm. long, the uppermost +longer (12 to 20 mm.); central spines 3 or 4, the upper ones +turned upward and intermixed with the radials, the lower one very +stout, 15 mm. long, subulate from a very thick bulbous base, +straight (rarely slightly curved) and porrect (deciduous in old +specimens): flowers 3 to 5 cm. long: fruit oval, elongated, about +2 cm. long, green: seeds elongated-obovate. brown and smooth, +about 1.8 mm. long. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 10) Type, the +Wright and Bigelow specimens in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +On limestone hills, from the Pecos River, southwestern Texas, and +southern New Mexico, westward to the Rio Grande (from Presidio +del Norte northward). Fl. June. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright of 1849, 1851, 1852; Bigelow of +1852; Engelmann, with no number or date; Evans of 1891). + +The characteristic appearance of the plant is given by the very +stout and straight central spine standing in each cluster +perpendicular to the plant body. The range of this species, +between the Pecos and the upper Rio Grande, suggests another +separated group, such as is presented by C. scolymoides sulcatus +to the east, between the Brazos and Nueces. Very frequently +specimens of C. echinus occur in which some of the tubercles do +not develop central spines, and then the spine characters +resemble those of C. radians. In C. radians, also, an occasional +porrect central spine is found. These intergrading forms I have +only seen in Mexican material. For discussion of relationships +see under C. scolymoides. + + ** Flowers red. + + Central spine solitary or sometimes wanting. + +51. Cactus dasyacanthus (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 259 + (1891). + + Mamillaria dasyacantha Engelm. Syn. Cact. 268 (1856). + +Subglobose, 3.5 to 6.5 cm. high, simple: tubercles slender and +terete, spreading, lightly grooved even to the base, 8 to 10 mm, +long: radial spines 30 to 50, mostly in two series, straight and +loosely spreading, the exterior ones (25 to 35) capillary and +white, 6 to 18 mm. long, the interior ones (7 to 13) stiffer +(setaceous), longer and darker and black-tipped; the central +spine straight and porrect, 12 to 20 mm. long, often wanting: +flowers small, red: fruit ovate, small (8 to 10 mm. long?): seeds +globose-angled, almost black, pitted, 0.8 to 1.2 mm. long (Ill. +Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 12. figs. 17-22) Type, Wright 110 in Herb. +Mo. Bot Gard. + +From Eagle Pass, Texas, westward to El Paso and southern New +Mexico, and southward into Chihuahua. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright 110 of 1852): New Mexico (Vasey +of 1881; Mearns of 1892, in Big Hatchet Mountains) Chihuahua +(Pringle 251 of 1885, in part). + +Pringle 251 as distributed to Nat. Herb. is C. tuberculosus. + +52. Cactus maculatus, sp. nov. + +Obovate-cylindrical, 6 by 8 cm., somewhat cespitose: tubercles +ovate, terete, 10 mm. long, grooved to the base, with naked +axils: radial spines 10 or 11, straight and spreading, rigid, +blackish (becoming ashy with age), black-tipped, 12 mm. long; +central spine large, more or less spotted, erect, 25 to 35 mm. +long: flower 13 mm. long, pinkish: fruit unknown. Type in Herb. +Coulter. + +San Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891). + +Somewhat resembles C. tuberculosus in general appearance, but +very different in spine characters. + +53. Cactus brunneus, sp. nov. + +Obovate-cylindrical, 3 by 6 cm., simple: tubercles ovate, grooved +to the base, 5 to 6 mm. long, with woolly axils: radial spines 11 +to 15, spreading, rather rigid and brownish (lighter with age), 8 +to 10 mm. long; central spine much larger, 20 mm, long, hooked: +flower and fruit unknown. Type in Herb. Coulter. + +San Luis Potosi. + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891). + + ++ Central spines 3 to 12. + +54. Cactus conoideus (DC.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria conoidea DC. Rev. Cact. 112 (1829). + Mamillaria strobiliformis Engelm. Wisliz. Rep. 113 (1848), not + Scheer (1850). + +Ovate-conical, 3.5 to 10 cm. high, 4 to 7 cm. in diameter below, +with densely woolly vertex, simple: tubercles conical, about 12 +mm, long, closely appressed-imbricate ("giving the plant the +appearance of a pineapple or cone"): radial spines 10 to 16, ashy +to white, straight and stout, 6 to 10 mm. long, the upper longer +(10 to 15 mm.); central spines 3 to 5, stouter, brownish-black, +10 to 16 mm. long, the two or three smaller ones erect-spreading, +the single lower one more rigid, porrect or deflexed, 15 to 20 +mm. long: flowers 2 to 3 cm long and wide, deep purple: fruit +unknown. (Ill. DC. Mem. Cact. t. 2) Type unknown. + +On rocks, Coahuila and Nuevo Leon to San Luis Potosi and southern +Mexico. + +Specimens examined: Coahuila (Palmer 378 of 1882; Pringle 3117 of +1890): Nuevo Leon (Wislizenus of 1847): San Luis Potosi (Poselger +of 1851; Eschanzier of 1891). + +55. Cactus potsii (Scheer) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 (1891). + + Mamillaria potsii Scheer in Salm Cact. Hort. Dyck. 104 (1850). + +Cylindrical, 30 to 35 cm. high, 2.5 to 3 cm. in diameter, +somewhat branching: tubercles ovate, obtuse, very lightly +sulcate, with somewhat woolly axils: radial spines very numerous +(entirely covering the whole plant), slender and white; central +spines 6 to 12, stouter from a broad base: flowers large, green, +or reddish: fruit red. Type unknown. + +From the Rio Grande region, near Laredo, Texas, to Chihuahua. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Poselger of 1851): Chihuahua +(specimens from Coll. Salm-Dyck.). + +56. Cactus tuberculosus (Engelm.) Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 +(1891). + + Mamillaria strobiliformis Scheer in Salm Cact. Hort. Dyck. 104 + (1850), not Muhlenpf. (1848), nor Engelm. (1848). + Mamillaria tuberculosa Engelm. Syn. Cact. 268 (1856). + +Ovate to cylindrical, 5 to 15 cm. high, 2.5 to 5 cm. in diameter, +simple or branching at base: tubercles short-ovate from a broad +base, 5 to 6 mm. long, deeply grooved, crowded and imbricate, at +length covering the older parts as naked and gray corky +protuberances: radial spines 20 to 30, slender but stiff, white, +radiant and interwoven with adjacent clusters, 4 to 8 mm. long +(uppermost rarely 10 to 12 mm.); central spines 5 to 9, stouter, +purplish above, the upper ones longer, erect, 10 to 14 mm. long +(sometimes even 16 to 18 mm.), the lower one shorter (6 to 8 +mm.), stout, porrect or deflexed: flowers about 2.5 cm. in +diameter, pale purple: fruit oval, elongated (sometimes almost +cylindric), red, about 18 mm. long: seeds subglobose, brown and +pitted, very small (0.8 to 1.2 mm. long). (Ill. Cact. Mex. +Bound. t. 12. figs. 1-16) Type of Scheer's strobiliformis is +unknown; but the specimens of Prince Salm-Dyck in Herb. Mo. Bot. +Gard. are marked "authentic" by Dr. Engelmann. The Wright +specimens in the same Herb, represent the type of M tuberculosa +Engelm. + +From the mountains of extreme southwestern Texas (common west of +Devil's River), southward into Chihuahua and Coahuila. Fl. +May-June. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 29, +30,31,32, 535, of 1849 and 1852; Bigelow of 1852; Engelmann, with +no number or date; Evans of 1891): Chihuahua (Pringle 250, 251 in +part, and 258 of 1885): Coahuila (Palmer of 1880): also specimens +from Coll. Salm. Dyck in 1857; also growing in Mo Bot. Gard. 1893 +(specimens, sent by G. G. Briggs in 1892 from El Paso, Texas. + +The identification of Engelmann's tuberculosa with Scheer's +strobiliformis was made by Dr. Engelmann himself upon an +examination of Scheer's type. The use of the specific name +tuberculosa is necessitated by the law of homonyms, as +strobiliformis had been used twice already before it was taken up +by Scheer. M. strobiliformis Muhlenpf. is C. scolymoides +sulcatus; and M. strobiliformis Engelm. is C. conoideus. + +57. Cactus viviparus Nutt. in Fraser's Cat. (1813). + + Mamillaria vivipara Haw. Syn. Succ. Suppl. 72 (1819). + +Low and depressed-globose, usually proliferous and cespitose +(forming large masses), but sometimes simple: tubercles terete +and loose, lightly grooved: radial spines 12 to 20, stiff and +white, often dark-tipped, 6 to 8 mm. long; central spines usually +4 (sometimes less, often more, even as many as 8), brownish, 8 to +12 mm. long, 3 spreading upwards, the lowest stouter and shorter +and deflexed: flowers about 3.5 cm. long (large for the size of +the plant) and even broader when expanded, bright purple: stigmas +pointed with a short mucro: fruit oval, pale green, juicy, 12 to +18 mm. long: seeds yellowish-brown, obliquely obovate and curved +about the small hilum, 1.4 to 1.6 mm. long). (Ill. Cact. Mex. +Bound. t. 74. fig. 3, seeds) Type unknown. + +On the northwestern plains, from the boundary provinces of +British America (western Manitoba, Assiniboia and Alberta), and +throughout the Upper Missouri region, southward through western +Nebraska to western Kansas and to the eastern foothills of +central Colorado. It is also mentioned by Howell (Cat. of +Oregon, Washington and Idaho plants), as occurring beyond the +Rocky Mountain divide in Idaho and Washington, which is probable, +but no specimens have been seen. + +Specimens examined: Montana (Hayden, nos. 1854, 1855; Vernon +Bailey of 1890, near Bridger): Colorado (Hayden of 1869): +Nebraska (Rydberg 1379 of 1893, Thomas Co.): also specimens +cultivated in St. Louis in 1869; also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. +1893. + +It seems best to keep this northwestern form specifically +separate from that large assemblage of southern forms that have +been commonly referred to it. The forms referred to this species +from western Kansas (Smyth's check list) have not been examined, +and they may represent intermediate forms, inclining to simple +habit and ovate form, as in the Colorado forms. The southern +type (C. radiosus) is distinguished from C. viviparus not only by +its very different range, but also by its ovate to cylindrical +form, simple habit, more numerous (12 to 40) and longer (6 to 22 +mm.) radial spines, usually more numerous (3 to 14) central +spines in which the upper are more robust than the lower, porrect +lower central, obtuse stigmas, and brown obovate straight seeds. + +58. Cactus radiosus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria vivipara Engelm. Pl. Fendl. 49 (1849), not Haw. + (1819). + Mamillaria radiosa Engelm. Pl. Lindh. 196 (1850). + Mamillaria vivipara radiosa texana Engelm. Syn. Cact. 269 + (1856). + +Ovate or cylindrical, 5 to 12.5 cm. high and about 5 cm. in +diameter, simple or sparingly proliferous: tubercles terete, more +or less grooved above, 8 to 12 mm. long: radial spines 20 to 30, +straight, slender, with with dusky apex, very unequal, 6 to 8 mm +long; central spines 4 or 5, stouter, yellowish or tawny, 8 to 12 +mm. long, the upper ones the longer and more robust, the lowest +one shorter and porrect: flowers 3.5 to 5.5 cm. long, about the +same diameter when fully open, violet to dark purple: stigmas 7 +to 9, obtuse: fruit oval and green: seeds yellowish or brown, +obovate, pitted, fully 2 mm, long. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. +74, fig.5, seeds) Type, Lindheimer of 1846 in Herb. Mo. Bot. +Gard. + +Extending across southern Texas, from the Guadalupe to El Paso. +thence into contiguous New Mexico and across the Rio Grande near +Juarez (northern Chihuahua). Fl. May-June. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Lindheimer of 1846): New Mexico +(Bigelow of 1855): Chihuahua, near Juarez (Evans of 1891): also +specimens cultivated from the type in St. Louis in 1846. + +Attention has been called under C. viviparus to the characters +that distinguish from C. radiosus The characters there given for +the latter species apply to to the whole group of included forms. +The type of the species is the var. Texana of Engelmann's Syn. +Cact. and Mex. Bound., which is characterized in the above. +description. + +59. Cactus radiosus neo-mexicanus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria vivipara radiosa neo-mexicana Engelm. Syn. Cact. + 269 (1856). + +Generally lower (3.5 to 10 cm.) and subglobose to ovate or even +sub-cylindrical, branching at base or simple, with more numerous +(12 to 40) radial spines, more numerous (3 to 12) and purplish +centrals, and smaller seeds. (Ill. Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 74. fig. +4, seeds) Type, presumably the Wright, Bigelow, and Schott +specimens from western Texas, New Mexico, and Sonora, all in +Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +From southern Utah, central Colorado, and western Kansas, +southward through western Texas, New Mexico and Arizona into +Chihuahua and Sonora. + +Specimens examined: Kansas (Carleton 530 of 1891, in Meade +County): Oklahoma (Carleton 233 of 1891): Colorado (Hall and +Harbour of 1862; Brandegee 645 of 1873; Hicks of 1890): Utah +(Siler of 1870): New Mexico (Wislizenus of 1846; Fendler 244, +271, of 1847: Wright 298; Bigelow of 1853; G. R. Vasey of 1881): +Texas (Wright of 1849, 1851, 1852; Bigelow of 1853): Arizona +(Rothrock, with no number or date): Sonora (Schott of 1855): +Chihuahua (Evans of 1891, near Juarez). + +It is through this variety that C. radiosus approaches most +nearly to C. viviparus, in the forms with few radials and +centrals, but the specific characters seem to hold. This is the +Mamillaria vivipara of the Syn Fl. Colorado (Porter and Coulter). + +60. Cactus radiosus arizonicus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria arizonica Engelm Bot. Calif. i. 244 (1876). + +A robust globose or ovate simple form (7.5 to 10 cm. in +diameter), with long (12 to 25 mm.) deeply-grooved tubercles, 15 +to 20 long (10 to 30 mm.) rigid whitish radial spines, and 3 to 6 +centrals deep brown above. Type, the specimens of Cous, Palmer, +Bischoff and Johnson, all in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Sandy and rocky soil from southern Utah through northern and +western Arizona to southern California. + +Specimens examined: Arizona (Cous of 1865; Cous & Palmer of 1865 +and 1872; Palmer of 1869; Bischoff of 1871; Miller of 1881; Rusby +617 of 1853; Pringle of 1884): Utah (Johnson of 1871, 1872, 1874; +Parry of 1875, 1877): California (Parish of 1880): also specimens +cultivated in Mo. Bot. Gard. in 1881; and in Meehan's Gard. in +1882. + +61. Cactus radiosus deserti (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria deserti Engelm. Bot. Calif. ii. 449 (1880). + +Subglobose or oval (5 to 10 cm. high) and simple, with deeply +grooved tubercles (slender and about 12 mm. long), 25 to 30 +rather long (10 to 16 mm.) grayish white radial spines (the +larger with reddish tips), 3 or 4 shorter and stouter centrals +with 5 or 6 intermediate ones above, small (2.5 cm. long) +straw-colored flowers (becoming purplish-tipped), 5 or 6 stigmas, +and obliquely obovate curved seeds. Type, Parish 433 in Herb. +Mo. Bot. Gard. + +In the mountains bordering the deserts of southeastern California +(San Bernardino County) and extending to central Nevada (Reese +River Valley). + +Specimens examined: California (Parish 453 of 1880, also of 1882; +Bailey of 1890): Nevada, Lincoln County (Coville & Funston of +1891, Death Valley Expedition): also specimens cultivated in +Meehan's Gard. in 1882. + +The smaller straw-colored flowers alone suggest the propriety of +keeping this form specifically distinct, but even in size and +color there is an occasional tendency toward the specific +character. The obliquely obovate curved seeds resemble those of +C. viviparus. The plant densely covered with stout ashy-gray +interlocking spines is easily recognized. + +62. Cactus radiosus chloranthus (Engelm.). + + Mamillaria chlorantha Engelm. Wheeler's Rep. 127 (1878). + +Oval to cylindrical (7.5 cm. in diameter, sometimes 20 to 22.5 +cm. high), with 20 to 25 gray radial spines almost in two series, +6 to 9 stouter reddish or brownish-tipped centrals (12 to 25 mm. +long), and yellowish or greenish-yellow flowers 3.5 cm. long and +wide. Type: Southern Utah specimens of both Parry and Johnson +occur in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard., but they are all referred to C. +radiosus arizonicus, and I can find no trace of any specimens of +C. radiosus chloranthus in the Engelmann collection. + +Southern Utah, east of St. George (Parry; Johnson). + +The plant is evidently near C. radiosus deserti, of which variety +it seems to be the Utah representative, but in the absence not +only of the type, but even of authentic specimens, the two are +kept separate, a thing fully justified by the description. + +63. Cactus radiosus alversoni, var. nov. + +Differs from var. deserti in its more robust and branching habit +(becoming 12.5 cm. tall and 10 cm. in diameter), shorter and +thicker tubercles, more numerous (12 to 14 centrals) stouter and +longer (12 to 22 mm.) spines, all of which are black-tipped (the +centrals black half way down, shading into red), and pink +flowers. Type, Alverson's specimens in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. and +in Herb. Coulter. + +In the desert region of extreme southeastern California. + +Specimens examined: Southern California (A. H. Alverson of 1892): +also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +The covering of stout bushy interlocking spines is like that of +var. deserti, but the black and reddish coloration gives a +decidedly different appearance. On account of this appearance of +a reddish-black brush the plant has been popularly called +"foxtail cactus." The decidedly pink flowers were sent by Mr. S. +B. Parish from specimens growing in cultivation in San Diego, and +are not from the original collection of Mr. Alverson. + +64. Cactus macromeris (Engelm.) Kuntze Rev. Gen. Pl. 260 (1891). + + Mamillaria macromeris Engelm. Wisliz. Rep. 13 (1848). + Mamillaria heteromorpha Scheer in Salm. Cact. Hort. Dyck. 128 + (1850). + Mamillaria dactylithele Labouret, Monogr. Cact. 146 (1858). + +Ovate or cylindrical, 5 to 10 cm. high, simple or branching from +the base and at length cespitose: tubercles large, loose and +spreading, from a dilated base, more or less elongated (12 to 30 +mm.) and teretish (often incurved), the groove absent in young +plants and never reaching the axil: radial spines 10 to 17, +slender and terete, or stouter and often angled, spreading, 12 to +40 mm. long, whitish (or more or less rose-colored when young), +straight or a little curved; central spines 4 (or fewer in young +plants or even wanting), spreading, 25 to 55 mm. long, stouter, +bulbous at base, mostly black (the lowest the longest and +stoutest), straight or sometimes curved or twisted: flowers 6 to +7.5 cm. long and of same diameter, deep red to purple: fruit +ovate-subglobose, green, 15 to 25 mm, long: seeds +globose-obovate, yellow, and smooth. 1.2 to 1.6 mm. long. (Ill. +Cact. Mex. Bound. t. 14 and 15) Type, Wislizenus of 1846 in +Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. + +Mostly in loose sand, in the valley of the Rio Grande (on both +sides of the river), from southern New Mexico to Eagle Pass, +Texas, and doubtless further down. + +Specimens examined: New Mexico (Wislizenus of 1846; Wright 384, +531, of 1852; G. R. Vasey of 1881): Texas (Wright of 1850, 1851, +1852; Bigelow of 1852): Chihuahua (Evans of 1891; Budd of 1891): +also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +This species shows an interesting transition from Coryphantha to +Echinocactus. The woolly groove of the Coryphantha extends from +the spine-bearing areola to the axil of the tubercle, where it +expands into the flower-bearing areola. In C. macromeris the +groove extends only about half way down the tubercle and gives +origin to the flower-bearing areola on the side of the tubercle; +while in Echinocactus the flower-bearing areola becomes adjacent +to the spine-bearing areola and the flower appears at the summit +of the tubercle. + +ARTIFICIAL KEY TO THE SPECIES. + +It seems impossible to make a simple artificial key that will +serve as a useful guide to each individual species and variety. +Our knowledge of so many of the species is imperfect, that no set +of characters can be applied throughout. However, as no plants +are collected in such fragmentary condition, it will be useful to +construct a key based upon such characters as are always likely +to be present, even if specific distinctions are not always +reached. In many cases, species are so closely and differently +related to each other that the complete descriptions will have to +be consulted to determine the differences, and in such cases the +artificial key can only indicate the group. Even the full +descriptions are very compact, all characters not necessary for +discrimination having been eliminated. No attempt need be made +to determine any species by means of the flowers alone. In most +cases more or less of the plant body will be available, +presenting spine and tubercle characters, and these are used in +the following key. The distinction between Eumamillaria and +Coryphantha, on the basis of grooveless and grooved tubercles +should always be made out easily. It may be useful to suggest as +a caution, however, that often tubercles in drying develop folds +which simulate grooves, and especially is this true in +quadrangular tubercles. In such cases it is necessary to restore +the original plumpness of the tubercle by boiling, before the +presence or absence of the groove can be definitely determined. +The species and varieties are indicated only by their specific or +varietal names in the following key, and the numbers refer to the +serial numbers of the synoptical presentation. Forms occurring +within the United States are marked with an "*": + + I. Tubercles never grooved. + + * Central spines none. + +Radials 5 to 9, stout. + meiacanthus* (7). + +Radials 20 to 40. + micromeris* (12), greggii (13). + +Radials 40 to 80. + lasiacanthus* (10), denudatus* (11). + + + ** Central spine solitary and not hooked. + + + Central spine longer than the radials. + +Radials 7 or 8: tubercles very long (40 to 50 mm.). + longimamma (36). + +Radials 15 to 20: tubercles 6 to 8 mm. long. + eschanzieri (21). + + ++ Central spine shorter than the radials. + +Radials 5 to 9, stout. + meiacanthus* (7). + +Radials 9 to 22. + heyderi* (5), hemisphaericus* (6), gummiferus (8), gabbii +(34), + sphaericus (35). + + *** Central spine solitary and hooked. + + + Stems slender cylindric: Lower Californian. + +Centrals 1, 20 to 30 mm. long. + roseanus (23). + +Centrals 1 to 4, 20 to 50 mm. long. + setispinus (24). + + ++ Stems depressed-globose to ovate. + +Radials 4 to 6, rigid. + uncinatus (9). + +Radials 8 to 12. + wrightii* (15). + +Radials 15 to 30. + grahami* (19), eschanzieri (21). + +Radials 50 to 60. + barbatus (18). + + **** Central spines more than one, and none of them hooked. + + + Slender or sometimes stout cylindrical plants, branching at + base: Lower Californian. + + brandegei (3), setispinus (24), halei (25). + + ++ Depressed-globose to ovate and stout cylindrical. + + ++ Radials few (3 to 12) and rigid: Mexican. + +Radials 3: centrals 3. + alternatus (1) + +Radials 7 or 8: tubercles 40 to 50 mm. long. + longimamma (36). + +Radials 10 to 12: tubercles 12 to 15 mm. long. + gummiferus (8). + + + ++++ Radials numerous (16 to 60), capillary or bristle-like. + +Radials 15 to 30, slender but rigid (bristly). + acanthophlegmus(2), densispinus (4), bispinus (14), + rhodanthus (26), sulphureospinus (27), palmeri (29), + pringlei (32). + +Radials 30 to 60 or more, mostly capillary. + tetrancistrus* (22), capillaris (28), texanus* (31), + spaerotrichus (33). + + ***** Central spines more than one and but one of them hooked. + +Radials 10 to 15. + goodrichii* (16), setispinus (24). + +Radials 15 to 30. + pondii (17), grahami* (19), bocasanus (20). + +Radials 30 to 60. + tetrancistrus (22). + + ****** Central spines more than one, and more then one of them + hooked. + +Radials 8 to 12. + wrightii* (15). + +Radials 30 to 60. + tetrancistrus (22). + + II. Tubercles with a more or less prominent groove. + + * Central spines none. + + + Radials whitish and rigid, oppressed (pectinate) and + interwoven with adjacent clusters. + +Depressed-globose and simple. + compactus (44). + +Globose and simple. + radians* (45), corniferus (47). + +Cespitose. + pectenoides (46), sulcatus* (49). + + ++ Radials more slender and spreading. + +Radials 10 to 17. + missouriensis* (37), similis* (38), macromeris* (64). + +Radials 30 to 50, capillary. + dasyacanthus* (51). + + ** Central spine solitary, not hooked. + + + Central spine porrect. + +Radials 6 to 17. + missouriensis* (37), robustior* (39), scheerii* (40). + +Radials 30 to 50, white and capillary. + dasyacanthus* (51). + + ++ Central spine curved downwards. + +Radials 8 to 12. + sulcatus* (49). + +Radials 12 to 26. + robustispinus (41), recurvatus (42), corniferus (47), + scolymoides* (48). + + +++ Central spine erect: Mexican. + +Radials 7 or 8: central 50 mm. long. + salm-dyckianus (43). + +Radials 10 or 11: central 25 to 35 mm. long. + maculatus (52). + +Radials 13 to 16. + compactus (44). + + *** Central spine solitary and hooked. + +brunneus (53). + + **** Central spines more than one and none of them hooked. + +Centrals 2: radials 6 to 20. + scheerii* (40), robustispinus (41), recurvatus (42), + scolymoides* (48). + +Centrals 3: radials 6 to 40. + scheerii* (40), scolymoides* (48), echinus* (50), + conoideus (54), neo-mexicanus* (59), arizonicus* (60). + +Centrals 4 or 5: radials 6 to 40. + scheerii* (40), scolymoides* (48), echinus* (50), + conoideus (54), tuberculosus* (56), viviparus* (57), + radiosus* (58), neo-mexicanus* (59). arizonicus* (60), + macromeris* (64). + +Centrals 6 or 7: radials 12 to 40. + potsii* (55), tuberculosus*(56), viviparus* (57), + neo-mexicanus* (59), arizonicus* (60), chloranthus (62). + +Centrals 8 to 14: radials 12 to 40 or more. + potsii* (55), tuberculosus* (56), viviparus* (57), + neo-mexicanus* (59), deserti* (61), chloranthus* (62), + alversoni* (63). + + GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION + +It is only possible to deal with the forms that occur within the +borders of the United States, as even individual stations of +common Mexican forms are little if at all known. These United +States forms represent a northern extension of an abundant +Mexican display. The group EUMAMILLARIA, containing twelve of +the thirty-one forms defined as occurring north of the Rio +Grande, makes the feeblest extension northward, at no place being +found far from the boundary, and all the twelve are Mexican forms +which extend but slightly into the United States. Only five of +the forms are found east of the Pecos: heyderi, the most widely +distributed EUMAMILLARIA, extending from the southeastern border +of Texas westward along the whole Mexican boundary except in +California; hemisphaericus, extending through southern Texas and +southern New Mexico; meiacanthus, also along the Mexican border +of Texas and New Mexico; texanus, a low ground form of the Rio +Grande Valley, extending from the mouth of the river to El Paso, +and suggesting a connection with the West Indian stellatus; and +sphaericus, another low ground valley form of similar range, but +apparently only extending up the Rio Grande to the region of +Eagle Pass. + +The Pecos forms the eastern boundary of five other EUMAMILLARIA +forms: micromeris, extending northward from Coahuila and +Chihuahua, apparently only in the mountains between the Pecos and +El Paso; wrightii, of similar narrow northward extension, but +ranging further northward on the high plains of the Upper Pecos +in New Mexico; denudatus, also with a narrow northward extension +west of the Pecos; lasiacanthus, extending from Chihuahua with a +northern limit between the Pecos and Arizona; and grahami, a +Sonoran type which has spread between the Pecos and southeastern +California. + +The ten preceding forms have evidently entered our borders from +the highlands of Sonora and Chihuahua, with the exception of the +Rio Grande Valley forms, texanus and sphaericus. Another +species, tetrancistrus, is also a Sonoran type which has reached +the eastern slopes of the mountains of southeastern California, +and extended through western Arizona to southern Nevada and +southern Utah, the most extended northern range of any +EUMAMILLARIA. The twelfth form, goodrichii, is Lower +Californian, and extends into California only in San Diego +County. A summarized statement of the distribution of our twelve +EUMAMILLARIA would be that two of them have extended from the low +grounds of Coahuila and Chihuahua and spread along the valley of +the Rio Grande; nine have come from the high grounds of Chihuahua +and Sonora, four of which have extended eastward to the low +levels of southeastern Texas; four have kept to the highlands +west of the Pecos, and one has kept to the Colorado Valley and +its tributaries, while one has a short northern extension from +Lower California. + +The nineteen forms of CORYPHANTHA are decidedly more northern in +their distribution, and are our characteristic representatives of +the genus Cactus. Ten of these, however, are but northern +extensions of Mexican forms, and six of the ten have simply that +tongue-like northern extension in the mountains between the Pecos +and the Upper Rio Grande (above. El Paso), viz.: dasyacanthus, +tuberculosus, scheerii (which has also spread somewhat east of +the Pecos), and the three pectinate and closely related forms +radians, echinus, and scolymoides. Of the four remaining Mexican +forms, macromeris is a low ground Rio Grande Valley form, +extending from above El Paso well towards the Lower Rio Grande; +potsii just crosses the border in the neighborhood of Laredo; and +radiosus and neo-mexicanus have by far the greatest northern +extension, stretching from Sonora and Chihuahua to southern Utah +and central Colorado, and eastward to the Guadalupe River of +Texas. + +The nine remaining coryphanths are distinctly forms of the United +States, occupying two well-marked regions, viz.: the northern +plains, and the desert region of western Arizona and adjacent +California, Nevada, and Utah. In the former region is found the +widespread viviparus, which extends from the southern borders of +British America to the plains of eastern Colorado and western +Kansas, and even crosses the Rocky Mountain divide into northern +Idaho and northeastern Washington; and missouriensis, which also +ranges from the high prairies of the Upper Missouri to the same +southern limit, and is continued southward into Texas in its +varieties similis and robustior. + +In the Arizona desert region, four distinct but closely allied +forms have become differentiated from the strong radiosus stock, +viz.: arizonicus, deserti, alversoni, and chloranthus, all of +which might be regarded as distinct species. In southeastern +Texas is found an isolated form, sulcatus, occurring between the +Brazos and Nueces rivers. That viviparus must be regarded as a +strong northern extension of the radiosus stock can not be +doubted, as the low depressed cespitose northern form seems to +merge southward so gradually into the simple more robust ovate to +cylindrical forms of radiosus as to suggest the propriety of +regarding them all as specifically identical. + +The result of a closer inspection of the distribution of these +nearly related forms is worthy of note. C. viviparus extends +from British America and the Upper Missouri to eastern Colorado +and western Kansas; neo-mexicanus (the form most nearly related +to viviparus) extends from central Colorado and southern Utah +into Mexico; at the southeastern edge of this range begins +radiosus and extends eastward through southern Texas; from the +western edge of neo-mexicanus the form arizonicus extends +westward into southern California, touching chloranthus at its +Utah limit, and at its California extension reaching alversoni +and deserti, the latter of which extends northward into the +desert region of southeastern California and adjacent Nevada. +Taking this type as of Mexican origin, it seems to have entered +the United States from Sonora and Chihuahua, and to have spread +in three directions, viz.: eastward through southern Texas; +westward and northwestward into southern California and southern, +Utah; and northward to the head waters of the Missouri and +British America, though we would limit the northern extension of +the present specific type to central Colorado, and would regard +the still more northern forms as of the same origin but entitled +to specific rank. + + + 2. ANHALONIUM Lem. Cact. Gen. Nov. (1839). + +Depressed or flattened, simple, unarmed plants, covered with +peculiar imbricated tubercles above and their scale-like remains +below: tubercle with lower and upper parts very different; lower +part comparatively thin and flat; upper exposed part triangular +in outline and divergent, very thick and hard, the lower surface +smooth and keeled, the upper surface plane or convex, smooth or +tuberculate or variously fissured, with a broad wool-bearing +groove or simply a more or less evident tomentulose apical +areola: spine-bearing areola obsolete: flower-bearing areola at +the summit of the lower peduncle-like portion of the very young +tubercle (thus appearing axillary with reference to the exposed +part of the tubercle) and bearing a dense penicellate tuft of +long soft hairs which conceals the lower part of the flower and +the entire fruit and persists about the apical region of the +plant as matted and apparently axillary wool: ovary naked: seeds +large, black, and tuberculate: embryo obovate, straight. + +According to the present views concerning generic limitations in +Cactaceae, Anhalonium must certainly be kept distinct from +Mamillaria, and to such a view Dr. Engelmann had finally come. +The generic distinction is based upon such characters as (1) the +complete suppression of the spine-bearing areolae; (2) the strong +differentiation of the tubercles into two very distinct regions; +(3) the production of the flower at the apex of the basal or +penduncle-like portion (which becomes flattened and expanded at +maturity) of a very young tubercle; and (4) the large tuberculate +seeds. + +In the case of engelmanni the broad woolly groove of the upper +portion of the tubercle expands below into the flower-bearing +areola, but terminates blindly above just behind the sharp apex. +In prismaticum and furfuraceum the groove is obliterated, but +there usually remains a small (more or less tufted) areola and +depression just behind the apex to mark its upper extremity. +This apical areola therefore, does not represent a spine-bearing +areola, but the closed upper extremity of a tubercle groove. + +It seems evident that Anhalonium is a much modified Cactus, and +that its affinity is with the coryphanths, through such a species +as C. macromeris, in which the flower becomes extra-axillary. If +in macromeris, with the flower standing well up on the tubercle, +the portions of the tubercle above and below the flower should +become very different from each other, the upper portion being so +much modified as to cause the spine-bearing areola to be +obliterated, the condition of things in Anhalonium would be +obtained. + + * Upper surface of tubercle with a broad and deep wool-bearing + longitudinal groove which widens below. + + +1. Anhalonium engelmanni Lem. Cact 42 (1839). + + Mamillaria fissurata Engelm. Syn. Cact. 270 (1856). + Anhalonium fissuratum Engelm. Bot. Mex. Bound. 75 (1859). + +Depressed globose or flat, top-shaped below and tapering into a +thick root, 5 to 12 cm. in diameter: tubercles (upper portion) +appressed-imbricate, 12 to 18 mm. long and about as wide at base, +the upper surface convex and variously fissured (presenting an +irregular warty appearance) even to the edges: flowers apparently +central, about 2.5 cm. long and broad, shading from whitish to +rose: fruit oval, pale green, about 10 mm. long: seeds 1.6 mm. +long. (Ill. Bot. Mex. Bound. t. 16) Type unknown; but specimens +of Wright, Bigelow, and Parry in Herb. Mo. Bot. Gard. are the +basis of Engelmann's Mamillaria fissurata. + +On limestone hills, in the "Great Bend" region of the Rio Grande +in Texas, and southward into Coahuila. Fl. September-October. + +Specimens examined: Texas (Wright of 1850; Bigelow of 1852; +Parry, with no number or date; Lloyd of 1890; Evans of 1891; +Briggs of 1892): also growing in Mo. Bot. Gard. 1893. + +This species is very closely related to the Mexican A. kotchubeyi +Lem. (A. sulcatum Salm-Dyck), but unfortunately no type of that +species seems to be in existence, and Dr. Engelmann notes (Mex. +Bound. Rep. 75) that "it seems no living or dead specimen is at +present extant in Europe." Judging from the description, the +upper surface of the tubercles in A. kotchubeyi, aside from the +central furrow, is smooth; at least the margin is "very entire." + + ** Upper surface of tubercle not grooved, but usually with a + tomentose pulvillus at the tip. + + +2. Anhalonium prismaticum Lem. Cact. 1 (1839). + + Mamillaria prismatica Lem. Hort. Univ. i. 231 (1839). + Cactus prismaticus Kuntze, Rev. Gen. Pl. 261 (1891). + +Flat above, top-shaped below, 7.5 to 12.5 cm. in diameter: +tubercles (upper portion) close]y imbricate but squarrose- +spreading, sharply triangular-pyramidal and very acute (with a +sharp cartilaginous tip, which usually disappears with age and +leaves the older tubercles blunt or retuse), 18 to 25 mm. long +and about as wide at base, the upper surface almost plane and +smooth, except that it is more or less pulverulent and usually +bears a small tomentose pulvillus (often evanescent later) just +behind the claw-like tip: flowers rose-color: fruit elongated- +oval and reddish. (Ill. Lem. Cact. t. 1.) Type unknown. + +Referred to Mexico in general, but reported definitely only from +San Luis Potosi. Undoubtedly found in Coahuila, and possibly +crosses the Rio Grande in the region of the "Great Bend." + +Specimens examined: San Luis Potosi (Eschanzier of 1891): Mexico +in general (specimens from Coll. Salm-Dyck in 1858; Schott of +1858): also specimens cultivated in Mo. Bot. Gard. in 1881; also +growing in same garden in 1893. + +3. Anhalonium furfuraceum (Watson). + + Mamillaria furfuracea Watson, Proc. Amer. Acad. xxv. 150 +(1890). + +Very closely related to prismaticum; but triangular portion of +tubercle acuminate and shorter, having an irregularly mamillate +upper surface, and the acumination ending abruptly in a +cartilaginous depression containing a tomentose pulvillus: +flowers 2.5 to 3 cm. long, white or pinkish, the sepals brownish. +Type, Pringle 2580 in Gray Herb. + +At Carneros Pass, Coahuila. + +Specimens examined: Coahuila (Pringle 2580 of 1889). + +The type of this species was not among the collections received +from Cambridge, but a specimen of the same distribution from the +National Herbarium shows tubercle dimensions different from those +recorded in Dr. Watson's description. In that description the +triangular terminal surface is said to be "about an inch broad by +one-half inch," which is decidedly different from the equilateral +surface of the tubercle of prismaticum. In the National +Herbarium specimen of furfuraceum, however, of the same +distribution, the surface is almost equilateral, measuring 15 mm. +long by 18 mm. wide at base. Without the acuminate upper portion +the breadth of the triangular portion would be about double its +length. The lower rim of the cup-like depression which +terminates the tubercle and contains the pulvillus is sometimes +slightly prolonged into a tooth, which in prismaticum becomes the +sharp tip of the tubercle. The "minutely +furfuraceous-punctulate" character of the tubercle is common to +all the species of Anhalonium I have seen, and simply represents +the external openings of the remarkably long cuticular +passageways to the stomata. + +4. Anhalonium pulvilligerum Lem. Cact. (1839). + + Anhalonium elongatum Salm-Dyck (1850). + +This seems to be a third grooveless Mexican species. I have seen +no specimens, but judge from the description that it differs from +the two preceding species chiefly in its less crowded and more +elongated tubercles (triangular portion 5 cm. long by 2.5 cm. +broad at base), which are covered at apex with a tomentose +pulvillus. + + GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION. + +This curious genus is strictly Mexican, and, so far as at present +recorded, is characteristic of Coahuila, but a single species +(engelmanni) of the four or five known crossing the Rio Grande in +the Great Bend. + + + 3. LOPHOPHORA, gen. nov. + +Depressed-globose, proliferous and cespitose, tuberculate-ribbed, +unarmed plants: tubercles at first conical and bearing at summit +a flower-bearing areola with a dense tuft or short pencil of +compact erect hairs, when mature becoming broad and rounded (with +the remnant of the penicellate tuft as a persistent pulvillus in +a small central depression) and coalescing into broad convex +vertical ribs: spine bearing areolae obsolete: flowers borne at +the summit of nascent tubercles: ovary naked (that is free from +scales, but often downy): fruit and seed unknown. + +These forms have been variously referred to Anhalonium and +Echinocactus, but seem to deserve generic distinction. They +differ from Anhalonium in the entire suppression of the upper +highly differentiated portion of the tubercle, in the broad and +rounded development of the lower portion, and in the coalescence +of the enlarged tubercles into broad vertical ribs. In fact, in +young specimens, the plant appears almost smooth, with shallow +furrows radiating from the depressed apex. The genus differs +from Echinocactus in the suppression of the spine-bearing +areolae, and the naked ovary. In the examination of developing +tubercles the relation to Anhalonium is evident. In the latter +genus the young tubercle bears on the summit of its pedicel-like +lower portion the tufted flower-bearing areola the modified upper +portion of the tubercle at that time appearing as a bract beneath +the flower. In Lophophora there is the same condition of things, +except that the bract-like upper portion is wanting. From this +point of view it would appear that the differences between +Lophophora and Echinocactus are intensified by the fact that the +flower-bearing areola in the former genus is to be regarded as +really lateral on a tubercle the upper part of which has +disappeared. This genus occurs abundantly in southeastern Texas, +extending southward into Mexico. Mrs. A. B. Nickels reports that +the Indians use the plants in manufacturing an intoxicating +drink, also for "breaking fevers," and that the tops cut off and +dried are called "mescal buttons." + +1. Lophophora williamsii (Lem). + + Echinocactus williamsii Lem. Allg. Gart. Zeit. xiii. 385 +(1845). + Anhalonium williamsii Lem. in Forst Handb. Cact. i. 233 +(1846). + +Hemispherical, from a very thick root, often densely proliferous, +transversely lined below by the remains of withered tubercles: +ribs usually 8 (in young specimens often 6), very broad, +gradually merging above into the distinct nascent tubercles which +are crowned with somewhat delicate penicellate tufts, which +become rather inconspicuous pulvilli on the ribs: flowers small, +whitish to rose: stigmas 4. (Ill. Bot. Mag. t. 4296) Type +unknown. + +Along the Lower Rio Grande, Texas, and extending southward into +San Luis Potosi and southern Mexico. + + + + + +End of this Project Gutenberg Etext of A Preliminary Revision of +the North American Species of Cactus, Anhalonium, and Lophophora +by John M. Coulter. + diff --git a/1221.zip b/1221.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..243ea5b --- /dev/null +++ b/1221.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f359b83 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #1221 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1221) |