fankhaurseri

[Ekion]

Creo que para asegurar de que se tratan de la misma especie, tendríais que valorar la idea de tomar una muestra de semillas de las distintas poblaciones. Si los indivíduos parentales muestran unos rasgos fenotípicos que permiten distinguir las diferentes poblaciones, comprobar que esos rasgos fenotípicos son debidos al factor ambiental y no al genotípico es tan sencillo como poner a germinar las semillas en un ambiente uniforme y comprobar que las plantas resultantes muestran un fenotipo igual entre sí e independiente de las diferencias parentales (demostrando que esas diferencias son fenotípicas y no heredables).

SIENTO ENROLLARMEEEEEEE!!!!

[pescaomarino]

Hola

pues me han comentado que en el ultimo numero de septiembre de British Cactus & Succulent Journal. Hay un articulo llamado "Rearrangements in the systematics of Eriosyce napina (Phillippi) Katterman," by Helmut Walter & Wendelin Machler.

las especies que se toman son:

E. napina
E. napina ssp. lembckei
E. napina ssp. tenebrica
E. napina ssp. fankhauseri
E. napina ssp. riparia


Firstly they replace Thelocephala at subgeneric level with Chileonapina (Kreuzinger) as they claim this takes priority at subgeneric rank.

They describe E. napina ssp. riparia as follows:-

Holotype Chile Prov. Elqui. east of Trapiche.

Distribution: Recorded only from the vicinity of Trapiche, Choros Valley. It was also "reported" from further west of this locality, but one must take into account that younger plants of E. heinrichiana growing in the lower Choros valley west of Trapiche can be very easily mistaken for it if not in flower or fruit.

Etymology. From the Latin ripa, river bank.

Eriosyce napina ssp riparia differs from subspecies tenebrica in having smaller bodies, much fewer ribs, smaller, rounded tubercles without chins, a yellow style and nectary: much smaller, nearly globular seeds not notched above the hilum; a finely tuberculate testa; a round hilum, a non oblique hilum position, the micropyle being partly separated from the hilum tissue and its small, spherical seedlings with minute erect cotyledons.

Detailed description; Roots connected to the stem by a necklike constriction. Stem subglobular to flattened, 2-4cm diameter, grey-brown, the sunken apex covered with short brownish wool. Ribs 10-12, reduced to rounded tubercles, 3-6mm diameter, without chins. Areoles oval, not sunken, Spines all radial, blackish, 1-2mm long, stout, spreading. Flower to 4cm long, narrow funnelform, perianth segments 4-6mm wide, lanceolate, brownish yellow. Nectar Chamber and style yellowish. Nectary tubular. Pericarpel and tube covered with abundant light brown wool and orange brown bristles. Ovary elongated. Fruit red, elongating before maturity, armed like the pericarpel. Fruit Wall thin at maturity, opening by a small basal pore. Seeds contained only in upper part of fruit. Seed very small, isodiametric-rounded, 0.8-0.9 x 0.8 x 0.8mm, not notched on ventral side above hilum. Testa blackish, finely tuberculate, not ribbed. Hilum rounded keyhole-shaped, basal, not oblique. Micropyle partly excluded from hilar tissue. Seedling (at 4 weeks) tiny, 1.2mm, spherical, Cotyledons barely visible, erect.

Eriosyce napina ssp riparia grows sympatrically with populations of Eriosyce heinrichiana, Copiapoa coquimbana, Eulychnia acida a few individuals of Echinopsis coquimbana and Eriosyce simulans.

This distinct local endemic taxon is completely isolated by high mountains on the southernmost edge of the distribution of subgenus Chileonapina near the locality of Trapiche (Prov. Elqui) in the Choros valley. It had been mistaken for quite a time by various collectors and authors for T. tenebrica F. Ritter (eg Kattermann 1994) or T. fankhauseri F. Ritter (eg Hoffmann 1989), mainly because of misunderstandings caused by misleading information on the type locality of the latter, and lack of sufficient knowledge of habitat plants from Ritters type localities. Ritter did not seem to have found the plants that grow around Trapiche, otherwise he would have surely described them as new. Who actually discovered them remains unclear (probably R. Wagenknecht) but they had been officially mentioned for the first time at this locality on the herbarium entry card of California University Botanic Gardens in 1952 (P.C. Hutchison nr. 432. UCBG) under the provisional name of Neochilenia (Neoporteria) napina (Phil.) Backeberg var. floccosa (lanigera). It was illustrated in Backeberg (1962: 3787. Abb. 3435) as "Neochilenia sp."


Bueno, resulta que ahora a la JA40 la publicaron como Eriosyce napina ssp. riparia

ploP!

justo cuando yo creo haber encontrado el eslabon perdido... que las une en E. tenebrica



pero las canas priorizan

[pescaomarino]

aqui una foto de una Eriosyce napina ssp. riparia (alias Eriosyce tenebrica) de Trapiche... algo hibrida, con E. heinrichiana


miren los pelos marrones y algo de lanosidad en el fruto de E. tenebrica
sus espinas son negras, pequeñas y pectinadas

Eriosyce heinrichiana tiene espinas grandes y gruesas, flores y fruto con paredes casi desnudas, con pequeña lanosidad en las areolas...

y el mix
JA153

[Ekion]

Eres un crack pescao!!!!

¿Puedes hacer estudios con semillas del medio? Sería una forma buena de aclarar dudas en cuanto a diferencias fenotípicas debidas a los factores ambientales. Podrías obtener una serie bastante uniforme y que aclarara sobre la distinción específica o las distintas formas de una misma especie...

Un saludo y sigue trabajando duro. Estoy seguro de que acabarás descubriendo algo importante para la comunidad científica y especialmente para todos nosotros, los amantes de los cactus.

UN ABRAZO.

[goyco!]

para k es la botella?

[pescaomarino]

para k es la botella?

el calor hace que la flor se abra más rapidamente...

[goyco!]

aaa ok gracias