Not Cereus peruvianus
 

"Cereoid+10" wrote in message
m...
The name Cereus peruvianus has been for years been misapplied in the
horticultural trade to a group of species native to eastern Brazil
(not
Peru).

The nearly spineless plant that is most often seen under the name is
actually Cereus hildmannianus.
It is the species misidentified as Cereus peruvianus in Benson's "The
Cacti
of the United States and Canada".

C. hildmannianus is less common here (AZ desert), probably because it
grows much taller than C peruvianus. But there are many of both types
planted locally in landscapes and both are frequently misidentified.

The spineless cactus here is the totem pole, a mutation of Pachycereus
schottii. It is less common than the others.

Olin

Not Cereus peruvianus
 

As I said, there is no Cereus peruvianus.

The plant to which you are allude is probably either Cereus uruguayensis or
Cereus jamacaru. They are tropical species with thin ribs and only survive
in the southwest in cultivation and if frequently watered.

Lophocereus (you say Pachycereus) schottii fa. monstrosus is something
completely different. It is not the only spineless cactus popular in
cultivation. Think Astrophytum and Ariocarpus.


jc wrote in message
...
"Cereoid+10" wrote in message
m...
The name Cereus peruvianus has been for years been misapplied in the
horticultural trade to a group of species native to eastern Brazil
(not
Peru).

The nearly spineless plant that is most often seen under the name is
actually Cereus hildmannianus.
It is the species misidentified as Cereus peruvianus in Benson's "The
Cacti
of the United States and Canada".

C. hildmannianus is less common here (AZ desert), probably because it
grows much taller than C peruvianus. But there are many of both types
planted locally in landscapes and both are frequently misidentified.

The spineless cactus here is the totem pole, a mutation of Pachycereus
schottii. It is less common than the others.

Olin