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; Wright226, 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 hemisphaericaEngelm. Pl. Lindh. 198 (1850).
Differs in being hemispherical instead of flat-topped, in its fewer (9 to12) 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 meiacanthaEngelm. 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 inHerb. 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 gummiferaEngelm. 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 uncinataZucc. in Pfeiff. Enum. 34 (1837). Mamillaria bihamataPfeiff. in Otto and Deitr. Gart. vi. 274 (1840) Mamillaria aduncaScheidw. (1845-1849?).Mamillaria depressaScheidw. (1845- 1849?).
