hey guys, id a pal buy some plants recently but couldnt really identify them .. would appreciate if you guys could help :)
The cactus on the left in front is an Echinocereus. You'll have better luck finding the species name when it blooms (gorgeous blooms that they are!). The cactus on the right seems to be a Gymnocalycium. Could be G. buenekeri, G. denudatum or G. horstii. The succulent in back is a Crassula. As its exhibits the leaf shape of both 'Hobbit' & 'Gollum' it is considered by just the one name. Trouble is, I cannot remember just which one! :P
after staring at cacti for mulitple hours. mm i dug up a list of possiblities for the plants: Echinocereus scopulorum Echinocereus websterianus havent had much luck with the echinocereus you see :( Gymnocalycium horstii Gymnocalycium ambatoense Gymnocalycium denudatum Gymnocalycium buenekeri cant figure the rear one though still :( got some for the echinocereus too. but theyre not echinocerues. so guess their wrong : Frailea knippeliana Mammillaria backebergiana Parodia leninghausii Mammillaria moelleriana Pygmaeocereus bylesianus Weberbauerocereus rauhii Echinopsis bruchii Coryphantha werdermannii Mammillaria boolii Parodia comarapana Parodia commutans Parodia formosa Rebutia caineana Rebutia fiebrigii Turbinicarpus subterraneus Mammillaria nunezii Mammillaria supertexta but still, thanks loads guys!
The plants seem to be growing in peat, which means that they are mass-produced. That is one reason why I believe that it is a rigidissimus, it is sometimes seen in garden centers and similar, non-specialist places that sells this kind of cacti. The two you mention are uncommon even among specialized dealers, and I have never heard that they have been mass-produced. I attach a picture of a typical plant of this species (from a garden center), about the same size as yours. Do they look similar? Both statements are correct :-)
I agree with Echinocereus rigidissimus (but not var. rubispinus) for your plant ID. As Mandarin pointed out, this is one that has been mass produced. The other cactus is most likely Gymnocalycium horstii, as it is purported to have weaker spines than buenekeri (as yours looks to me). I checked my notes and I believe you have Crassula 'Gollum', as it can have both the quilled (like 'Hobbit') and tube leaf shapes on the same plant.
How did you see that? I usually start counting the spines when the identity is not obvious, but that is impossible to do on the photo.
I know it is very difficult to count spines from photos on the web, but I believe sometimes you can make an educated guess with certain criteria. I count 20-22 radial spines on Sodder's plant (using a magnifying glass on the enlarged photo). I believe Echinocereus rigidissimus should have 16-22 (some say 15-23) and Echinocereus rigidissimus v. rubispinus should have 30-35 radial spines. As I do not believe the spine count is anywhere near 30, I based my ID on that. Of course, I could be wrong. :p
Hm, many of the spines are very thin and would only appear on a close-up photo. I cannot count them on my own photo (but that plant has about 30 spines per areole). Well, perhaps your eyes are better than mine :-). I asked because the spines on v. rubispinus are more apressed to the body than on most rigidissimus v. rigidissimus, giving it a more "tidy" look, and I thought Sodder's plant looked like that.
