i So 
THE CACTACEAE. 
Echinocactus glabrescens Weber (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 8: 98. 1898) is only a name. 
Echinocactus hemifossus Lemaire and its variety gracilispinus (Illustr. Hort. 5: Misc. 10. 
1858) which came from Peru or Bolivia have never been identified. 
Echinocactus intricatus Salm-Dyck (Allg. Gartenz. 13: 387. 1845) is a homonym which 
no student has been able to identify. The flowers and fruit were unknown and it is of 
doubtful origin. To it the name Echinocactus criocerus Lemaire (Tabouret, Monogr. 
Cact. 178. 1853) has been referred. 
Echinocactus junori (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 8: 107. 1898), sometimes spelled E. 
juori, seems never to have been described. 
Echinocactus latispinosus (Link and Otto, Verh. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. 6: 431. 1830) 
is only a name. 
Echinocactus longispinus Scheidweiler (Forster, Handb. Cact. 347. 1846) is only a name. 
Echinocactus mamillosus Lemaire (Salm-Dyck, Cact. Hort. Dyck. 1844. 19. 1845) is 
only a name. 
Echinocactus merckeri Hildmann (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 5: 92. 1905) is only a cata¬ 
logue name. 
Echinocactus micracanthus Fennell (Forster, Handb. Cact. 347. 1846) is only a name. 
Echinocactus montevidensis G. Don (Sweet, Hort. Brit. ed. 3. 283. 1839) is without 
description and probably does not belong to this genus. 
Echinocactus olacogonus Audot (Rev. Hort. 6: 248. 1845) is briefly described as 58 cm. 
in diameter, flattened at the top. Galeotti is said to have had specimens in Brussells and 
Cels in Paris. The description follows a discussion of Echinocactus stainesii. Schumann 
makes no reference to the name and it is omitted from the Index Kewensis. 
Echinocactus oreptilis Haage (Forster, Handb. Cact. 347. 1846) is only a name. 
Echinocactus oxyacanthus (Forbes, Journ. Hort. Tour Germ. 152. 1837) is too briefly 
described to be definitely identified. 
Echinocactus pelachicus (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 20: 39. 1910) has never been de¬ 
scribed. 
Echinocactus platycarpus (Forster, Handb. Cact. 347. 1846) is only a name. 
Echinocactus plicatilis (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. x: 22. 1891) is only a name. 
Echinocactus pluricostatus (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 4: 193. 1894) is only a name. 
Echinocactus punctulatus (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 5: 106. 1895) is only a garden name 
of Weber. 
Echinocactus rebutii Weber (Monatsschr. Kakteenk. 5: 107. 1895) was listed by Schu¬ 
mann as growing in the Botanical Garden at Paris. We find no description or other infor¬ 
mation regarding it. It is possible that this was Weber’s first name for Rebutia minuscula. 
Echinocactus retusus Scheidweiler (Forster, Handb. Cact. 347. 1846) is only a name. 
Echinocactus salmii Jacobi (Allg. Gartenz. 19: 9. 1851) is of unknown origin and we 
find no other mention of it. 
Echinocactus sickmannii is unknown to us except from the description in Linnaea 
(12: Litt. 83. 1838). The only other reference which we have seen is that in the Index 
Kewensis (p. 1281) where it is credited to Lehmann. Steudel (Nom. ed. 2. 1: 537. 1840) 
credits it to South America. E. sickmannii of Forster (Handb. Cact. 347. 1846) and 
Labouret (Monogr. Cact. 266. 1S53), without descriptions, probably refers to the same 
plant. Labouret credits the plant to the Berlin Gardens. Its relationship is doubtful 
while its definite origin is unknown. It is described as follows: 
Depressed-globose, dull green, umbilieate at apex; ribs 20 or 21, acute, divided into oblong 
oblique tubercles; areoles white-tomentose; spines white, rigid; radial spines about 7, the upper 
ones smaller and more slender than the lower ones; central spine solitary, straight. 
Echinocactus sparathacanthus Martius (Forster, Handb. Cact. 344. 1846), supposed 
to be from Mexico, is without description. 
