BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions,research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research.

Mammillarias of OaxacaAuthor(s): Rick GillmanSource: Cactus and Succulent Journal, 84(4):187-194. 2012.Published By: Cactus and Succulent Society of AmericaDOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2985/0007-9367-84.4.187URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.2985/0007-9367-84.4.187

BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological,and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and bookspublished by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptanceof BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use.

Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercialinquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder.

2012 Volume 84 Number 4 187

Rick Gillman

Mammillarias of Oaxaca

During our two week tour of Oaxaca state (and southern Puebla) we encoun-tered a large number of succulent and other plants of interest, but amongst them the mammillarias were probably the most abundant in terms of the number of plants as well as the number of different species, regardless of how you count them! By my reckoning, we saw about 20 different spe-cies, some of which are rightly considered real gems of the cactus world. Identification of some of the species can be very difficult to be sure of in habitat, particularly for members of the M. supertexta group, a problem

acknowledged in the New Cactus Lexicon (NCL) (see page 159, M. haageana). In this article, I will try to indicate where there is possible doubt over the identification of individual plants. I have tackled them in the order that we first saw them, which is, roughly speaking, from south Puebla head south into Oaxaca state and keep going!

We had found our first mammillarias before lunch on the first day of our tour, and in fact saw plants from this family on every day in the field. The first find was near the Cañada de Cuicatlán, very pretty white plants that we thought at the time were M. haageana (Fig. 1). However, I believe these were actually M. supertexta, as the central spines on all the plants were pure white, not brown to black as in typical haageana. We found supertexta again, later in the trip, near a town called Tecomacava, which means, I believe, “eat cows”, and again (Fig. 2) close to Teotitlán (aren’t these Mexican town

names wonderful?), although plants there mostly had two central spines (which is not typical) with brownish tips (which is fine); perhaps these were in fact M. haageana. We encountered M. haageana and its variants frequently on the trip; near Teuhacán, Puebla (Fig. 3, this time with only one central spine, and Fig. 4, clumping, the ‘schmollii’ form); and on the way to our overnight stop at the magnificent-ly named small town of Santiago Chazumba (Fig. 5, a more globose form with short central spines). All of the variants were subsumed under the main species name in the NCL, and this is a view with which I would agree having seen plants in the field.

M. sphacelata proper and the ssp. viperina were also fairly commonly encountered. M. sphacelata is sometimes called the “dog dirt cactus” due to its

1 initially thought to be Mammillaria haageana, the white central spines on this plant, photographed near the cañada de cuicatlán, suggest this is M. supertexta.

2 another plant, close to Mammillaria haageana, seen near Teotitlán.

188 CaCtus aNd suCCuleNt JourNal

Figure 3. a form of Mammillaria haageana growing near Tehuacán, Puebla.Figure 4. The ‘schmolii’ form of Mammillaria haageana, also seen at Tehuacán.Figure 5. near Santiago chazumba, Mammilaria haageana is more globose.Figure 6. Mammillaria sphacelata, south of Teuhacán.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2012 Volume 84 Number 4 189

appearance as a clump of unfortunately-shaped whitish stems. We first found this plant (Fig. 6) growing south of Teuhacán

— small clumps of white stems each 1.5–3 cm broad, and in much larger clumps (Fig. 7) at “Derek’s Hill”, known as this as it was Derek Bowdery, the famous UK cactophile, who first brought the location to peoples’ attention. We also saw there small plants of M. napina with beautiful glassy-white spines (Fig. 8). It is a fantastic spot to visit, offering not only great plants but superb views over Puebla to the snow-capped Volcán Citlatpetl mountain.Coincidentally, growing nearby the plant in Fig. 6 were plants of Opuntia pubescens, a plant which is sometimes referred to as resembling a part of a dog’s anatomy which shall remain unnamed. We found Mammillaria sphac-elata ssp. viperina growing in more open clumps with longer branches, near “Derek’s Hill” (Fig. 9), as well as at other sites.

We found M. carnea, a fairly well known plant in culti-vation, at at least 6 sites, quite often in what appeared to be poorly drained substrate. It has very variable central spine length — from quite short, mostly less than 1 cm (Fig. 10), to comparatively long — 3 cm or more on some plants (Figs. 11 & 12), and can be solitary or found growing in large clumps. We were too late to see the flowers but there were plenty of ruby-red fruits. Some of the longer-spined plants looked somewhat like the allied M. mystax, which grows in the same general area, surrounding Teuhacán, but on rockier ground. M. mystax is one of my favourite mammillarias in cultivation, and now in habitat, as it can form quite large (to 15 cm or more) sturdy globose plants many of which have a wonder-ful “bird’s nest” of interwoven curly spines, particularly at the apex (Figs. 13 & 14).

Opposite:3 a form of Mammillaria haageana growing near Tehuacán, Puebla. 4 The ‘schmolii’ form of Mammillaria haageana, also seen at Tehuacán. 5 near Santiago chazumba, Mammilaria haageana is more globose. 6 Mammillaria sphacelata, south of Teuhacán. 7 Mammillaria sphacelata, a larger clump. 8 Mammillaria napina grows alongside M. sphacelata on “Derek’s Hill”. 9 Mammillaria sphacelata ssp. viperina. 10 a short-spined Mammillaria carnea (above), with longer spined forms (11 & 12), right.

Right: 13 & 14 Mammillaria mystax growing near Oaxaca city (left) and near a roadside dump, south of Tehuacán (right).15 Mammillaria huitzilopochtli.

11

11 12

13

14

15

190 CaCtus aNd suCCuleNt JourNal

On the short hike to see Echeveria laui near the town of Qui-otopec, we were fortunate to see quite a few other plants. These included Aloe barbadensis, apparently growing wild in quite the wrong continent! Amongst the other unexpected extras was M. huitzilopochtli (Fig. 15), a pretty plant with variable central spines that are often absent entirely. Note the flowers are quite a lot larger than in M. haageana and its closer allies. We had thought that we had found this species earlier the same day, when by chance we had to take a diversion due to a collapsed road, which meant that we had to cross a railway bridge in our vans! On the cliffside of the Cañon de Cuicatlán (Fig. 16) were growing a number of plants we thought were M. huitzilopochtli, but which John Pilbeam assures me are M. crucigera ssp. tlalocii (Figs. 17 & 18), a real gem of the family, just like John himself. The next day we did visit the habitat of M. crucigera ssp. cru-cigera. However, we had spent most of the day persuading the mayor of the nearby village of San Gabriel Casablanca (Fig. 19) to take us to see Fouquieria purpusii, so when we finally arrived at the crucigera site, we had insufficient time to undertake the climb to see the plants before it got dark. The best I could do was to take some shots with a telephoto lens (Fig. 20) — you can just pick out the grey-looking clumps of the plants at the top of the cliffs. I understand that in days gone by the plants grew much lower down too, but sadly these have all been dug up.

On a ridge north of Cuicatlán, at about 1400 m altitude, we found M. polyedra growing in a very unusual and stunning habitat, along with cycads (Dioon purpusii) and giant plants of Beaucarnea stricta. At first sight M. polyedra looks very similar to M. carnea, but is distinguished by its more cylindrical body and bristles in the axils. It grew in clumps on the ground (Fig.

16 The cliffs of cañon de cuicatlán.17 & 18 Mammillaria crucigera ssp. tlalocii, originally mistaken for M. crucigera ssp. crucigera.19 The mayor of San Gabriel casablanca

17

18

19

2012 Volume 84 Number 4 191

21) as well as epiphytically on beaucarneas (Fig. 22) and other small trees, along with a host of orchids, tillandsias, sedums, echeverias, agaves (yes, growing epiphytically) and other plants.

Another Mammillaria was found growing epiphytically north of Teotit-lán, again with cycads, orchids, tillandsias and other plants. This we think was M. flavicentra (Figs. 23 & 24), named for its yellowish central spines, although the NCL gives the same distribution area for this plant and M. dixanthocentron, which has two central spines, which tallied with the plants we saw (flavicentra is supposed to have four to six centrals). Also at this site, some plants had longer spines (look at the left hand plant in Fig. 25), looking quite similar to the plant we are familiar with as M. dixanthocentron, and its picture in the NCL. However, the flowers in these plants looked more like those shown in the NCL belonging to M. flavicentra, being larger and deep red to purplish, than those shown in the NCL for M. dixantho-centron, which are very small and pinkish. Furthermore, the NCL descrip-tion for M. flavicentra gives its flowers as very small, 3–4 mm in diameter, and red, which doesn’t seem to agree with the picture. So, in summary, I’m not sure which taxon we were looking at. To add further to the confusion, at another location, north-east of Oaxaca, we saw a very variable Mam-millaria which again at the time was thought to be aff. M. flavicentra with brown or white spines (Fig. 26), short spines (Fig. 27), or long spines (Fig. 28), and everything in between. Some looked like haageana ... others like supertexta. Moving swiftly on …

20 Mammillaria crucigera ssp. crucigera, seen from a distance.21 & 22 Mammillaria polyedra, north of cuicatlán, growing terres-trially and as an epiphyte.23 & 24 Mammillaria flavicentra.25 Mammillaria flavicen-tra looking a lot like M. dixanthocentron, also reported from the same area.

20 21 22

23

2425

192 CaCtus aNd suCCuleNt JourNal

In the Cañon El Boqueron we saw some plants, mostly too high up the canyon wall to photograph, that my notes say are M. albilanata ssp. oaxacana (Fig. 29). With hind-sight, these plants look very similar to some of the plants described in the preceding paragraph (!), but we did see what I would say is true M. albilanata ssp. oaxacana north of Tehuantepec (Fig. 30), and at a couple of other nearby locations closer to Oaxaca City (Fig. 31) — plants with the typical white wool associated with this species.

The real surprise find of the trip for me was M. pec-tinifera ssp. solisioides. We had stopped by chance at the top of a low rise in the road on the way back to Tamazulapán from the Cañon El Boqueron, because someone wanted to photograph a tree (!). We would not have noticed the plants at all, if they had not been in flower, as they are so small and grow close to the ground, but once we saw them, they seemed to be everywhere on the small rock plate that we were standing on, growing in small depressions, cracks

26–28. Mammillaria aff. flavicentra showing a degree of variability, touching on characteristics of several other species.

29 (below left) Mammillaria cf. albilanata ssp. oaxacana.30 & 31 The real Mammillaria albilanata ssp. oaxacana.

26

27

28

29 30

31

2012 Volume 84 Number 4 193

and crevices (Figs. 32–35). What wonderful little plants they are.M. karwinskiana proper (Fig. 36) and the ssp. nejapensis (Fig. 37) were seen at several sites south-

east of Oaxaca City. At first sight this could be confused with some of the other species, notably M. carnea, but it is distinguished by its flowers being a less striking whitish-straw colour with a purplish mid-stripe, and by its dichotomous branching habit. The ssp. nejapensis additionally has abundant white axilliary hair, often more dense at the crown, although from my own observations at some sites, there were intermediate forms to be found. Not far from Tehuantepec, we found plants resembling M.

karwinskiana ssp. collinsii (Fig. 38), none of which looked very happy with life!

I think that possibly the most difficult plant to find, even when, thanks to our guides, we knew we were standing within 20 feet of it, proved to be M. deherdtiana ssp. dodsonii, another wonderful gem of the Mammillaria genus, and one which I find par-ticularly difficult in cultivation. Perhaps some clues

32–35. Mammillaria pectinifera ssp. solisioides, an unexpected find at a random stop for photography.

36–38. Mammillaria karwinskiana in various incar-nations: ssp. karwinskiana (36), ssp.nejapensis (37) and ssp. collinsii (38).36

37 38

194 CaCtus aNd suCCuleNt JourNal

may be drawn from where we found it growing — at over 3000 m, amongst clumps of mosses and grasses on one rock boulder that was probably no more than 4m² (Figs. 39–41). We checked likely looking rocky places nearby for more plants, without success, so this plant is probably quite fussy!

The last Mammillaria we came across, on day eleven of the trip, was M. rekoi ssp. rekoi (Fig. 42), growing alongside M. karwinskiana ssp. nejapensis on rocky ground, but also epiphytically in some trees. For me, one of the main identifying features of this plant is

that it has one hooked central spine, although the NCL says only that it may have a hooked central spine. This statement rang a bell with me and looking back at my other images, I think we actually saw this plant at another site on day seven of our trip, although the plants there had very few hooked spines (as suggested is possible by the NCL). I don’t think I really took note of these at the time, but they can be seen clearly in my images

— problem solved! I am more familiar with the ssp. leptacantha (which has much longer curly hooked centrals) in cultivation — it is a very friendly cactus, reaching out from the bench to grab the back of your shirt as you walk by. Perhaps fortunately, I don’t think we saw this taxon on the trip, although I

did leave behind a few tee-shirts without checking them for unwanted passengers!

Sitting at my lap-top in my study, NCL and other refer-ence books in hand, I have learned that some cacti can be very difficult to identify in the field, particularly when it is impractical to lug the books along. What is more, although habitat plants don’t have any labels, I’m not sure that I would trust them even if they did!

39–41. Mammillaria deherdtiana ssp. dodsonii, almost undetectable without help.

42 Mammillaria rekoi ssp. rekoi.

41

40

39

42