Ritter F. in Hildegard Winter Katalog

Ritter F. (1963)
in Taxon 12(1):29

Original description, see above,

Ritter F. (1980)
Kakteen in Südamerika (3):1061

Ritter reports that the plant is rare in habitat and is associated with C. rubriflora, which extends to the north.

Taylor N.P. (1981)
A commentary on Copiapoa , The Cactus and Succulent Journal of Great Britain, 43(2/3): 49-60

Checklist

The following is probably only a variety: C. rubriflora F. Ritter in Taxon 12: 3’ (1963); Kakt. Südamer. 3: 1061 - 62, fig. 976 (1980). Type: Prov. Antofagasta, S. of Taltal, 1954, Ritter 211 (ZSS). C. hornilloensis and C. desertorum may also belong here. Doubtfully distinct from C. echinoides.'

'C. rupestris Ritt. (Taxon 1963) Plant no.23, map 4. KK 195, KK 612, FR 528.

Body-firm, green to 40 cm high, 11 cm across, making loose clumps. 13-15 ribs, 10-12 mm high, somewhat flattened with raised tubercles; Areoles--round, pale brown 7-10 mm across; Spines-subulate, mostly slightly recurved, dark brown becoming grey. 6-8 radials, 1-2 cm long. 1-3 centrals, 2-4 cm long; Flower-2.5 cm long with short acuminate petals, ca. 13 mm long, 5-7 mm wide, pale saffron. Stamens :t 15 mm long, pale saffron. Style 17-19 mm long, stigma with about 8 lobes; Fruit-green to red-green, 15 mm long, 7 mm wide with 6-12 reddish scales. Seed I mm long, 0.7 mm wide with white, oval hilum;
Habitat-rocky coastline near Cifuncho.

Note: Taylor (1981) suggests C. rubriflora could be a variety of C. rupestis. To be considered here would be C. hornilloensis and C. desertorum.'

Eggli U., Schick M.M. & Leuenburger, B.E. (1995)
Englera 16: 522

Copiapoa rupestrisFR528
Sample at the Utrecht Herbarium
Image by Paul Klaassen

Ritter 528: Copiapoa rupestris F. Ritter - Taxon 12(1): 31, 1963.
Typus (T): Ritter 528 (U 145327B, SGO, ZSS [seeds only]) (Holotype cited for U l.c., 28.).

loc. 1:     Chile: Typus-lokalität Cifuncho“ = type locality Cifuncho.
U 145327B HOLO - (corp), ar, sp (Assumed to represent the holotype as this is the only specimen present.)

loc.2:      Chile: coast at Cifuncho, on rocks. - Locality data according to KS 3:1061. ZSS S10309 Type number - sem (Leg. F. Ritter 1957.)

loc. 3:     Chile: "Cifuncho Nr. 7“. - /2. /1956. - Collection date according to original Ritter seed sample at ZSS.
SGO 124891 (in 2 parts) ISO - rad, corp, ar, sp
ZSS SR13465 ISO-sem

The authors concentrate on environmental issues rather than the taxonomy and use the name C. desertorum in which they include C. rupestris

Retained this as a good species, without varieties and all the species discussed above reduced to synonymy

8.  C. montana, C. olivana and C. rupestris. Are these distinct from C.taltalensis?

GC: I have no more information about this since I wrote my book. The most difficult thing for me was differentiating forms of C. hypogaea from forms of C. humilis since the two are very similar. I cannot include C. rupestris with these because of its ability to grow into huge mounds (C. desertorum). The other names you list are all similar, like humilis or hypogaea. The Quebrada Oliva would appear to contain plants like humilis and hypogaea and both have been collected and distributed as C. olivana, I think a name best left as a synonym of C. montana.

FK: C. montana, C. olivana and C. rupestris are close to C. atacamensis and C. taltalensis. Graham Charles illustrates two different plants. His fig. 79 is what grows north of Taltal and fits Ritter‘s description, but his fig. 80 is not the same and could be C. humilis.

NT: I‘m not sure what the other protagonists here think, but for my money C. montana, C. olivana and C. grandiflora are all closely related and might be the same thing in more or less geophytic forms (C. hypogaea is perhaps also allied). C. rupestris for me is a member of the C. marginata complex, like the undescribed plant referred to above, from Botija.

Hunt D. (Ed.) (2002)
Cactaceae Systematics Initiatives 13:12-15

Hunt D. (Ed.) (2002)
Cactaceae Systematics Initiatives 13:12