My grandmother gave me a start of a plant several years ago, but never
knew what it was. It is small, doesn't have leaves, doesn't bloom,
and slowly spreads on its own. To make a new plant, just cut a few 1"
pieces off and stick them in soil.

I took some pictures to help identify it:

http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant1.JPG
http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant2.JPG
http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant3.JPG

Thanks!

It looks like it could be a form of euphorbia, perhaps Euphorbia
mauritanica. Does it ooze a milky sap when you break off a portion?

pam - gardengal


"daecc" wrote in message
om...
My grandmother gave me a start of a plant several years ago, but never
knew what it was. It is small, doesn't have leaves, doesn't bloom,
and slowly spreads on its own. To make a new plant, just cut a few 1"
pieces off and stick them in soil.

I took some pictures to help identify it:

http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant1.JPG
http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant2.JPG
http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant3.JPG

Thanks!

I think that new Mars rover took pictures of a similar plant.

I think you will find that your plant is in full flower. very small flowers
in each leaf/scale joint. Look like little specks of yellow dust.
I am still trying to remember the name of the thing.

--
David Hill
Abacus nurseries
www.abacus-nurseries.co.uk

No, it just oozes a tiny tiny amount of clear liquid.


"Pam - gardengal" wrote in message news:69hKb.750902$Tr4.2079284@attbi_s03...
It looks like it could be a form of euphorbia, perhaps Euphorbia
mauritanica. Does it ooze a milky sap when you break off a portion?

pam - gardengal

That's not an unknown houseplant. Its very common in cultivation.

Its Crassula muscosa (formerly known as Crassula lycopodioides), at one time
commonly called "Watch chain plant".

http://www.cactuscenter.com/r_18.html

It does bloom but the flowers are rather small and inconspicuous but have a
foetid odor.

I can't believe the really bad guesses that others have made that aren't
even remotely close.


daecc wrote in message
om...
My grandmother gave me a start of a plant several years ago, but never
knew what it was. It is small, doesn't have leaves, doesn't bloom,
and slowly spreads on its own. To make a new plant, just cut a few 1"
pieces off and stick them in soil.

I took some pictures to help identify it:

http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant1.JPG
http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant2.JPG
http://www.dnecentral.com/djw/tmp/plant3.JPG

Thanks!

On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 05:40:40 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:

That's not an unknown houseplant. Its very common in cultivation.

Its Crassula muscosa (formerly known as Crassula lycopodioides), at one time
commonly called "Watch chain plant".

http://www.cactuscenter.com/r_18.html

It does bloom but the flowers are rather small and inconspicuous but have a
foetid odor.

I can't believe the really bad guesses that others have made that aren't
even remotely close.

I was waiting for you to post, Cereoid. Do you *enjoy* watching others
flail around? Or are you giving us all a fair chance at a correct
answer? I am *so* tickled when I can positively identify a 'mystery'
plant. Think it's happened twice. :-)

I gave you all a chance to go first but you kids let me down.

It should have been an easy one to ID but you were all stymied.

The closest was Skirmishd saying that they thought it might be a Crassula.
Very vague, especially when one considers that the genus is extremely
variable with over 200 species in it.

Identifying plants isn't as easy as you all seem to mistakenly believe it
is, isn't it?

Most people do very poorly at identifying succulent plants.

Don't know why but that's the way it is.


Frogleg wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 05:40:40 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:

That's not an unknown houseplant. Its very common in cultivation.

Its Crassula muscosa (formerly known as Crassula lycopodioides), at one
time
commonly called "Watch chain plant".

http://www.cactuscenter.com/r_18.html

It does bloom but the flowers are rather small and inconspicuous but have
a
foetid odor.

I can't believe the really bad guesses that others have made that aren't
even remotely close.

I was waiting for you to post, Cereoid. Do you *enjoy* watching others
flail around? Or are you giving us all a fair chance at a correct
answer? I am *so* tickled when I can positively identify a 'mystery'
plant. Think it's happened twice. :-)

I gave you all a chance to go first but you kids let me down.

It should have been an easy one to ID but you were all stymied.

The closest was Skirmishd saying that they thought it might be a Crassula.
Very vague, especially when one considers that the genus is extremely
variable with over 200 species in it.

Identifying plants isn't as easy as you all seem to mistakenly believe it
is, isn't it?

Most people do very poorly at identifying succulent plants.

Don't know why but that's the way it is.


Frogleg wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 05:40:40 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:

That's not an unknown houseplant. Its very common in cultivation.

Its Crassula muscosa (formerly known as Crassula lycopodioides), at one
time
commonly called "Watch chain plant".

http://www.cactuscenter.com/r_18.html

It does bloom but the flowers are rather small and inconspicuous but have
a
foetid odor.

I can't believe the really bad guesses that others have made that aren't
even remotely close.

I was waiting for you to post, Cereoid. Do you *enjoy* watching others
flail around? Or are you giving us all a fair chance at a correct
answer? I am *so* tickled when I can positively identify a 'mystery'
plant. Think it's happened twice. :-)

On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 16:53:53 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:


Frogleg wrote

On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 05:40:40 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:

That's not an unknown houseplant. Its very common in cultivation.

Its Crassula muscosa (formerly known as Crassula lycopodioides), at one
time
commonly called "Watch chain plant".

http://www.cactuscenter.com/r_18.html

I can't believe the really bad guesses that others have made that aren't
even remotely close.

I was waiting for you to post, Cereoid. Do you *enjoy* watching others
flail around? Or are you giving us all a fair chance at a correct
answer? I am *so* tickled when I can positively identify a 'mystery'
plant. Think it's happened twice. :-)

I gave you all a chance to go first but you kids let me down.

Identifying plants isn't as easy as you all seem to mistakenly believe it
is, isn't it?

Most people do very poorly at identifying succulent plants.

Don't know why but that's the way it is.

*I* certainly don't believe plant ID is easy. You, on the other hand,
are obviously an expert ('though very occasionally fallible). With the
bezillions (this is the certified scientific number) of plant genus
and species in the world, it's a wonder we can reliably ID a ginko!
Those of us who don't make an ongoing study of plants are gonna forget
what little we *do* know over time. I was once able to identify a
dozen different oaks and maples from their leaves. Now I'm thrilled to
be able to shout "American Sycamore" when a see a dry leaf. (I never
did very well on bark ID.)

Most people have little experience with succulents, not to mention
most of their (my) experience being with starts of plants called
"string of pearls" or "Indian something."

Outside of your specific expertise, your admonitions to provide
picures and/or to specify those details we once learned in biology
class -- opposite or alternate; lobed, smooth, or toothed; square or
not(?) stem -- are good advice to keep these queries from turning into
endless wrangles.

Sucking up? You betcha. A lot cheaper than buying a book (outrageous
expense) to have Cereoid on call.

Xref: kermit rec.gardens:261282


"Frogleg" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 16:53:53 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:


I gave you all a chance to go first but you kids let me down.

Identifying plants isn't as easy as you all seem to mistakenly believe it
is, isn't it?

Most people do very poorly at identifying succulent plants.

Don't know why but that's the way it is.

*I* certainly don't believe plant ID is easy. You, on the other hand,
are obviously an expert ('though very occasionally fallible). With the
bezillions (this is the certified scientific number) of plant genus
and species in the world, it's a wonder we can reliably ID a ginko!
Those of us who don't make an ongoing study of plants are gonna forget
what little we *do* know over time. I was once able to identify a
dozen different oaks and maples from their leaves. Now I'm thrilled to
be able to shout "American Sycamore" when a see a dry leaf. (I never
did very well on bark ID.)

Most people have little experience with succulents, not to mention
most of their (my) experience being with starts of plants called
"string of pearls" or "Indian something."

Outside of your specific expertise, your admonitions to provide
picures and/or to specify those details we once learned in biology
class -- opposite or alternate; lobed, smooth, or toothed; square or
not(?) stem -- are good advice to keep these queries from turning into
endless wrangles.

Sucking up? You betcha. A lot cheaper than buying a book (outrageous
expense) to have Cereoid on call.

Oh for heaven's sake, stop giving him more credence than he is due. Whatever
ability he may have at ID is no mitigation for his unfailingly smug
rudeness. I am more than willing to admit he has a remarkable ability (or so
it appears - he may just be blowing smoke) when it comes to cacti,
succulents or some tropicals - obviously his area of expertise - but notice
how he is not quite so quick on the draw when it comes to woodies or
perennials? He is not the slightest bit infallible and his sh*t stinks just
the rest of ours. Stop deifying the jerk.

Pammy, sad Pammy. You are taking your severe case of penis envy to new
extremes again!!

Maybe you should try blowing smoke up my pants for a change?
It would be good for my perennial woody!!


Pam - gardengal wrote in message
news:ib1Lb.761176$HS4.6015474@attbi_s01...

"Frogleg" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 16:53:53 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:


I gave you all a chance to go first but you kids let me down.

Identifying plants isn't as easy as you all seem to mistakenly believe
it
is, isn't it?

Most people do very poorly at identifying succulent plants.

Don't know why but that's the way it is.

*I* certainly don't believe plant ID is easy. You, on the other hand,
are obviously an expert ('though very occasionally fallible). With the
bezillions (this is the certified scientific number) of plant genus
and species in the world, it's a wonder we can reliably ID a ginko!
Those of us who don't make an ongoing study of plants are gonna forget
what little we *do* know over time. I was once able to identify a
dozen different oaks and maples from their leaves. Now I'm thrilled to
be able to shout "American Sycamore" when a see a dry leaf. (I never
did very well on bark ID.)

Most people have little experience with succulents, not to mention
most of their (my) experience being with starts of plants called
"string of pearls" or "Indian something."

Outside of your specific expertise, your admonitions to provide
picures and/or to specify those details we once learned in biology
class -- opposite or alternate; lobed, smooth, or toothed; square or
not(?) stem -- are good advice to keep these queries from turning into
endless wrangles.

Sucking up? You betcha. A lot cheaper than buying a book (outrageous
expense) to have Cereoid on call.

Oh for heaven's sake, stop giving him more credence than he is due.
Whatever
ability he may have at ID is no mitigation for his unfailingly smug
rudeness. I am more than willing to admit he has a remarkable ability (or
so
it appears - he may just be blowing smoke) when it comes to cacti,
succulents or some tropicals - obviously his area of expertise - but
notice
how he is not quite so quick on the draw when it comes to woodies or
perennials? He is not the slightest bit infallible and his sh*t stinks
just
the rest of ours. Stop deifying the jerk.

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:03:38 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12-"
wrote:

Pammy, sad Pammy. You are taking your severe case of penis envy to new
extremes again!!


Stanley Rukalski,

strikes again!

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:07:42 GMT, "Pam - gardengal"
wrote:

when it comes to woodies

a woody is something the laughing stock of the CSSA isn't capable of!

How would you know, Fluffernutter?

Did you do everyone at the Vegas convention?

You certainly missed the floor we were on!!!


Tom Jaszewski wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:07:42 GMT, "Pam - gardengal"
wrote:

when it comes to woodies

a woody is something the laughing stock of the CSSA isn't capable of!