APPENDIX. 225 



Cephalocereus hoppenstedtii. (See page 27, ante.) 



A wonderful display of this plant is shown in the photograph taken by C. A. Purpus 

 near the type locality in 1912. A mountainside is shown with many of the plants which 

 form the conspicuous objects in the landscape. 



Ccrcus hoogendorpii (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 4: So. 1894) and Pilocereus hoogendorpii 

 (vSchumann in Engler and Prantl, Pflanzenfam. 3''*: 181. 1894), only names, are the same 

 as this plant, according to Schumann. 



Espostoa lanata. (See page 61, ante.) 



Our attention has been called to a paper by Vincenzo Riccobono (Bull. R. Ort. Fi- 

 renze IV. 4: 94. 1919) on the first flowering of Pilocereus dautwitzii in Europe and a flower 

 of the plant has also been sent us by Riccobono. This seems to be the same plant as 

 the one collected by Dr. Rose in southern Ecuador in 1918. 



Illustration: Gartenflora 22: 115, as Pilocereus dautwitzii. 



Lemaireocereus hystrix. (See page 86, ante.) 



Cercus olivaceus, Lemaire, Rev. Hort. IV. 8. 643. 1859. 



The plant upon which Ccrcus olivaceus was based came from Santo Domingo. 



Lemaireocereus griseus. (See page 87, ante.) 



Both Cereus eburnens Salm-Dyck and Cactus cbunicits Link (Enum. Hort. Berol. 2: 22) 

 were published in 1822 and to both Cactus r-cnrcuuuis Willdenow (Enum. Hort. Berol. 

 Suppl. 32. 1813) was referred. Willdenow's plant, from the description, suggests a Ccfli- 

 alocereus but is referred to Ccrcus eburnens by the Index Kewensis. Link also refers it 

 to Hortus Dyckensis and to Haworth (Syn. PI. Succ. 179), while Salm-Dyck's descrip- 

 tion indicates that he had a plant before him different from Willdenow's. The Cercus 

 eburnens described by Pfeiffer (Enum. Cact. 90) was certainly a complex, a part coming 

 from Curacao and a part from Chile. For this reason, doubtless, Schumann (Gesamtb. 

 Kakteen 59, 108) has referred both names to Cercus coquimbanus and Ccrcus cbiinicus. 



Leocereus. (See page 108, ante.) 



Ccrcus oligolcpis Vaupel (Notizbl. Bot. Gart. Berlin 5: 285. 1913) we know only 

 from description. It is evidently not a Ccrcus but it suggests one of the species of Leo- 

 cereus and comes from Campo der Serra do Mel on the Rio Surumu, northern Brazil, the 

 region where these plants are found. It may be briefly described as follows: Plant i 

 meter high; ribs 5, i cm. high; areoles i cm. apart; radial spines 8 to 10, 5 mm. long; 

 central spine i, 2 cm. long; ovary bearing small scales. 



Cereus xanthochaetus Reichenbach (Terscheck. Suppl. Cact. Verz. 4) we know only 

 from the description of Walpers (Repert. Bot. 2: 340. 1843). He describes it as follows: 

 Erect, light green; ribs 7, nearly continuous, compressed above, obtuse; areoles yellowish 

 tomentose; spines 21, slender, yellowish, straight, the upper spines longer than the others. 



Heliocereus schrankii. (See page 127, ante.) 



Related to this species is Cereus ruber (Weingart, Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 15: 22. 

 1905). The flowers are described as orange-yellow, passing into scarlet. It is said to 

 come from Brazil, but no species of Heliocereus are known from South America. Weingart 

 (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 29:57. 1919) expresses his belief that C". rubcr is of hybrid origin. 



Trichocereus pasacana. (See page 133, ante.) 



Of this relationship the following species are known only from descriptions : 

 CEREUS TACAQUIRENSIS Vaupel, Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 26: 122. 1916. 



Columnar, 2.5 meters high; ribs low, about i cm. high, obtuse; spines numerous, setifonn; 

 hardly pungent, unequal, the longest 8 cm. long; flowers large, white, 20 cm. long, funndform; 

 inner 'perianth-segments oblong-spatulate ; stamens in 2 series, shorter than the perianth-segments. 



