76 THE CACTACEAE. 
ECHINOPSIS GIGANTEA R. Meyer, Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 29:58. 1919. 
Simple, ellipsoid to columnar, pale grayish green; ribs 8 to 11, high, broad at base, somewhat 
sinuous; radial spines 5 to 10; central spines sometimes 2, but usually solitary; flowers unknown. 
ECHINOPSIS SALUCIANA Schlumberger, Rev. Hort. IV. 5: 402. 1856. 
“Tube 15 to 16 cm. high, green, and covered with scales bearing tufts of brown hairs; sepals very 
numerous, lanceolate, 9 cm. long and 8 mm. wide at the base, dirty white with a central green stripe; 
petals 2 cm. wide and 6 cm. long, pure white; stamens yellowish; style short; stigma not projecting 
from the tube and having 12 yellowish-white stigma-lobes. ‘The flower lasts but one day. 
‘With its large narrow sepals (?) and wide petals, the flower resembles very much more the 
flower of a Cereus than that of an Echinopsis.”’ 
A free translation of the original description is given above. 
ECHINOPSIS DUCIS PAULI Forster, Handb. Cact. ed. 2. 641. 1885. 
Simple, columnar, 6 to 7 cm. in diameter; ribs 18 to 21; radial spines 6 to 8, 2 cm. long; central 
spines 2 to 4; flowers and fruit unknown. 
It is known only as a cultivated plant. 
ECHINOPSIS TACUAREMBENSE Arechavaleta, Anal. Mus. Nac. Montevideo 5:254. 1905. 
Dull green, 10 cm. high, about 15 cm. in diameter; ribs 13, vertical; areoles 1 cm. apart; spines 
9 or 10, I to 1.5 cm. long; central spine solitary; flowers white. 
Type locality: Not cited. 
Distribution; Uruguay. 
ECHINOPSIS ALBISPINA (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 13: 144. 1903) is described as a white-spined, very 
interesting form. 
EcHINOPSIS BECKMANNII (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 3: 103. 1893) and E. BOECKMANNI (Monatsschr. 
Kakteenk. 3: 165. 1893) are only names and have never been referred to any described 
species. ; 
ECHINOPSIS BOUTILLIERI Parmentier (Férster, Handb. Cact. ed. 2. 622. 1885) is only a name. ~ 
ECHINOPSIS DUVALLII (Monatsschr. Kakteenk 1:54. 1891) is from a seedling of unknown origin 
with pale rose flowers. . 
ECHINOPSIS FOBEANA (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 20: 190. 1910) is without description. A poor illus- 
tration is published by Mdllers (Deutche Gart. Zeit. 25: 475. f. 7, No. 20). ; 
ECHINOPSIS FORMOSISSIMA Labouret (Rev. Hort. IV. 4: 26. 1855) probably does not belong to this 
genus. It originally came from Chuquisaca, Bolivia, although it is credited to Mexico by 
the Index Kewensis. Schumann refers it to Cereus pasacana Weber. ‘Two illustrations 
of barren juvenile plants have been published (Méllers Deutsche Gart. Zeit. 25: 475. f. 7; 
No. 9 and Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 4: 187. f. 2). 
ECHINOPSIS LONGISPINA (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 3:127. 1893) is only a name. 
ECHINOPSIS MUELLERI (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 6:144. 1896) is a well-known garden form, pre- 
sumably ahybrid. It is described in some detail in the Cactus Journal and illustrated (2: 7) . 
ECHINOPSIS NIGRICANS Linke (Allg. Gartenz. 25: 239. 1857) is said to come from Chile. If so, it 
probably does not belong to this genus. ; 
ECHINOPSIS PARAGUAYENSIS Mundt (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 13: 109. 1903) is briefly mentioned. 
ECHINOPSIS POLYPHYLLA (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 19:144. 1909) is perhaps a hybrid. 
ECHINOPSIS PYRANTHA (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 4:97. 1894) has not been described but has been 
said to be the most beautiful species of the genus. . 
ECHINOPSIS QUEHLII (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 1: 55. 1891) is said to have been grown from Mexican 
seed. It is said to have beautiful pale rose flowers. If native to Mexico it must be refer- 
able to some other genus. Schelle lists it with the hybrids of E. eyriesii and E. oxygona. 
ECHINOPSIS SALM-DYCKIANA (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 20:142. 1910) is only a name. 
ECHINOPSIS TOUGARDII L. Herincq (Hort. Franc. 3: 193. pl. 17. 1853) is, according to Schuman, 
only ahybrid. It has very beautiful flowers. 
ECHINOPSIS TOBERCULATA Niedt (Allg. Gartenz. 25: 237. 1857), said to come from Bolivia, we do 
not know. 
ECHINOPSIS UNDULATA (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 11: 61. 1901) is briefly described as yellow-flowered 
and is probably a hybrid. 
