|
Original
Description
as
Echinocactus bridgesii Pfeiffer 1847,
Abbildung und Beschreibung Bluhender Cacteen. 2:2
Plate 14 Abbildung und Beschreibung Blühende Cacteen
(1846-1850)
In
Ritter F. (1980) -
Kakteen in
Südamerika (3):1057:
Die Originaldiagnose von PFEIFFER ist mir nicht zugänglich,
sie findet sich jedoch in LABOURETs Handbuch 1853, wo es auf S. 176 heißt
(Übersetzung aus dem Französischen):
"PFEIFFER, der eine Abbildung unserer Pflanze gegeben hat,
beschreibt sie folgendermaßen:
Körper groß, konisch, dicht bewollt, oben verdünnt, Körper
schmutziggrün, mit 10 breiten stumpfen Rippen.
Areole genähert, groß, oval, mit flockiger bräunlicher
oder weißlicher Wolle.
Stacheln 8, stark, rund, gerade, graubräunlich;
Randstacheln 7, divergierend, Mittelstacheln 1, abstehend und lang.
Blüte von unregelmäßiger Form, blaßgelb.
Rö. kurz, beschuppt und behaart. Perigonblätter in
mehreren Reihen, diejenigen des Kelches außen grünlich, die der
Blumenkrone gelb. Filamente und Beutel gelb, etwas den Griffel mit 10
stumpfen Narben überragend.“ Transferred to the genus Copiapoa
by Backeberg in 1959
References in Literature
|
|
|
Schumann K.
M. (1897-1898)
Gesamtbeschreibung der Kakteen |
|
Ritter (1980) comments:
SCHUMANN
hat 1898 ECHINOCACTUS BRIDGESII PFEIFFER mit ECHINOCACTUS ECHINOIDES
LEMAIRE synonymisiert,
der aber mit seinem halbflachem Wuchs und eingesenktem Scheitel und
einem viel größerem Durchmesser verschieden ist, wie unter COPIAPOA MARGINATA
ausgeführt. Dagegen hatte PFEIFFER, der Autor von ECHINOCACTUS BRIDGESII,
beide Arten als selbständig anerkannt, ebenso LABOURET 1853 und RÜMPLER
1886 in ihren Handbüchern. Man könnte leicht COPIAPOA BRIDGESII für ein
Synonym zu COPIAPOA MARGINATA halten; dagegen spricht aber, daß alle alten
Autoren zur Zeit, wo die Originale dieser Arten eingeführt waren, beide
als getrennte Arten ansahen. Die Beschreibung des ECHINOCACTUS BRIDGESII trifft
aber besser auf die Art von Chañaral zu mit der Angabe des konischen,
nach oben verdünnten Wuches, der dichten Bewollung, der ovalen Areolen, während
sie bei COPIAPOA MARGINATA später queroval werden, mit der Angabe von genäherten
(nicht zusammenfließenden) Areolen. |
|
|
|
|
Britton N. L. &
Rose J. N., (1922)
The Cactaceae (3) : |
|
as a synonym of C. echinoides. |
|
|
|
|
Ritter F. in
Hildegard Winter Katalog |
|
|
|
|
|
Backeberg C.
(1959),
Die Cactaceae 3:1909 |
|
Backeberg's concept of the species is based on
the description in Foerster_Ruempler, repeated here. Backeberg acknowledges
similarities with C. echinoides, from which he says, it differs by a
stronger build, stronger spination, outwardly curved Perigonbl.
and 10 Narbenlappen (7-8 for C. echinoides) and which
he found near Antofagasta. |
|
|
|
|
Ritter F. (1980)
Kakteen in
Südamerika (3):1057 |
|
Ritter once again criticizes Backeberg over the
identity of this taxon. |
|
|
|
|
Taylor N.P. (1981)
A
commentary on Copiapoa, The Cactus and Succulent Journal of Great
Britain, 43(1/3):
43-49
The
typification of old Copiapoa epithets
|
|
'C.
bridgesii; Echinocactus bridgesii Pfeiffer (1847), with tab.
Ritter has applied this name to a very distinctive plant found near the
northern limit of the region traversed by Bridges. However, while the
remarkable cephalium-like development of wool at the stem apex, mentioned
by Pfeiffer, is matched in the Ritter plant, it is otherwise rather
tall-growing, and seldom globose or conical as Pfeiffer’s description and
figure requires. For the time being it seems best to allow this
questionable identification to stand, since there is no other name
currently available for what is an unmistakable and beautiful species.'
|
|
Taylor N.P. (1981)
A
commentary on Copiapoa , The Cactus and Succulent Journal of Great
Britain, 43(2/3): 49-60
Checklist |
|
C. bridgesii (Pfeiffer) Backeb.,
Die Cact. 3: 1909 (1959); F.Ritter, Kakt. Südamer, 3: 1057 - 1060,
figs. -971 & 972 (1980); Echinocactus bridgesii Pfeiffer,
Abbild. Beschr. Cact. 2(3): t. 14 (1847). Type (see t. 14, l.c.)
collected in Chile by Thomas Bridges, probably in 1841. Ritter (l.c.)
has provided a neotype: Prov. Atacama, N. of Chañaral airfield, 1954,
Ritter 245 (ZSS!). Range: from midway between Caldera and Chañaral to
20 km. N. of Chañaral. Other illustration: The Chileans 11(38): 169
(1980).
A beautiful taxon for its cylindric stem with copious apical wool and
long upwardly directed central spines. Doubtfully distinct from C.
marginata; closely allied to C. echinoides and C.
rupestris |
|
|
|
Butcher D.
(1982)
The Genus Copiapoa, Calandrinia II
|
|
Body--elongated with ten broad and blunt ribs;
Areoles-large, oval-shaped and close together; Spines-Radials 7,
comb-like; Centrals 1, up to 3 cm long, sometimes longer;
Flower-small, inner petals sulphur yellow, outer greenish-yellow.
Taylor (1981) doubts whether this species is distinct from C. marginata.
|
|
|
|
Hoffmann A.
E. (1989)
Cactaceas en la flora silvestre de Chile: 102 - 107 |
|
as a variety of Copiapoa marginata. |
|
|
|
Meregalli M
& Doni, C (1991)
Piante Grasse Speciale - Il Genere Copiapoa |
|
|
|
|
|
Eggli U., Schick
M.M. & Leuenburger, B.E. (1995)
Englera 16:
162 |
|
Ritter 245: Copiapoa
bridgesii
(Pfeiffer) Backeberg
|
loc. 1: |
Chile:
mountains N of air strip of Chañaral. - /6./1954.
BGH1982 - fl, ic (corp)
(Ex cult. BG Berlin, 9. 6. 1982 (cult. ex sem. Cat. H. Winter 1957).
Collection number inferred.)
ZSS S10165 Type number- sem (Leg. F. Ritter 1955.)
ZSS T4806 NEO - corp. ar, sp (Leg. F. Ritter ex nat.)
ZSS T4807 ISONEO - corp, ar, sp (Leg. F. Ritter ex nat.)
ZSS T4808 ISONEO - ar, sp (Leg. F. Ritter ex nat.) |
|
loc. 2: |
Chile: "24 km nördl.
Chañaral, Nr. 5“ = 24 km N of Chañaral.
SGO 124857 ISONEO – (corp), ar, sp |
|
loc. 3: |
Chile: "nördl.
+ südlich Chañaral Nr. 7“ = N and 5 of Chañaral. -
/6. / 1954. - The locality obviously first read
"Chañaral Nr. 7“; later ,,Nr. 7“ was crossed out and now the locality
reads "nördl.
+ südl. Chañaral."
ZSS SR13316 -sem |
|
|
|
|
Schulz R. & Kapitany
A., (1996)
Copiapoa in their
Environment |
|
The species falls outside the
range covered.
|
|
|
|
|
Charles G. J., (1998)
Copiapoa
|
|
as C. marginata var. bridgesii
|
|
|
|
Hunt D.
(Ed.) (2001)
Coping with Copiapoa - 2,
Cactaceae Systematics Initiatives 12: 15-17 |
|
Placed in the Marginata Group. |
|
|
|
Taylor N.
P., (2001)
Roots and mucilage in Copiapoa,
Cactaceae Systematics Initiatives 12: 18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hunt D. (Ed.)
(2002)
Cactaceae Systematics Initiatives 13:12 |
|
Pfeiffer's plate is designated as
lectotype, and as a result, the taxon is referred to synonymy under
C. echinoides .
Ritter's reference is considered to be a misapplication
and listed as Copiapoa bridgesii sensu Ritter, a synonym of C.
marginata. |
|
|
|
Hoffmann A.E. & Walter H. (2004)
Cactaceas en la flora silvestre
de Chile (2nd Ed.): 130 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hunt D. (Ed.)
(2006)
The New Cactus Lexicon |
|
|
|
|
|
Schulz, R. (2006)
Copiapoa in their Environment (2006) |
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution
PK Comments
This
taxon provides another good example of how vague and inadequate early
descriptions of the Cactaceae have proven to be. Descriptions often
focused on features that differentiated the plant from other, previously
described species. As explorers introduced more plants to science, the
detail required to differentiate the new plant from previously described
species, increased. Few of the botanists that produced their descriptions
had any appreciation of habitat conditions and of the natural variability of
the plant they were studying.
As a result, two concepts of
this taxon emerge, one of a plant closely related to C. echinoides,
by Britton & Rose, and another of a plant that is close to / synonymous with
C. marginata, based on a neo-type proposed in 1980 by Ritter.
Seen on Copiapoathons at:
S090:
S090
See
Also
Copiapoa bridgesii
Collection A. W. Craig
The Chileans 11 (37), 1979 - cover drawing |
