the seeds is also entirely defferent. therefore I believe that this prevents its union with the species of 

 the Anhalonium. 



I admit that I would have classified this curious little plant with the Echinocactus theloidei, had I not 

 been stopped by the total absence of the scales on the bark. Until now I had been used to considering 

 this characteristic as being the limit between the Mamillaria and the Echinocactus, however if we 

 do not recognize this there would be nothing to distinguish the Coryphanta from the Echinocactus 

 theloideus. 



I know that between the bark of the Echincactus Scurii and that of the Mamillaria micromeris or the 

 Mamilaria elephantidens. there is a very small difference; the first is very slightly squamous and 

 could be confused very early with the green bark of the Coryphanta, which also has seeds. 



But in conclusion all our classifications, will always be, no matter what we do, artificial. Most of the 

 genders were established by most of the botanists since Linnaeus, and defined more or less 

 arbitrarily. That is to say they have nearly always found species that relate to the neighboring gender, 

 and if placed together with two or various genders could find their place in one or in the other; if one 

 could not be convinced to adopt certain characteristics which would defme them. 



I am obliged to admit that the more I notice the characters on which one may base the various 

 genders, the more I am confused instead of being clarified. I have always made myself to study 

 intensively the seeds of all the species that I have found, with the idea to be able to build something 

 on top of what already had been found. 



Frequently, because one has examined only a small number of species, one believes to be on the 

 track of a general and constant character. Then suddenly one is so astonished at having found several 

 exceptions that demolish all our previous knowledge.In this way for example, the Coryphanta and 

 Anhalonium seemed to me to be two groups separated by the relationship of the seeds.The greatest 

 majority of the Coryphanta have brown seeds with more or less smooth thin epidermis. You have 

 even specified (Bound Rep.) the "nunquam trabeculata". Well! the plant that is found from Saltillo 

 to the Rio Grande, is fairly abundant in certain localities, that you have without doubt included in 

 your descriptions of the Mamilaria strobiliformis and which is not entirely identical with the M. 

 comoidea DC, but are close neighbors( they seems to differ from the flower, which is biger, rose 

 colored and with larger non linear petalsTike the DC and which I saw in the interior of Mexico). As 

 I was saying this plant has an amazing analogy with the Anahalonium because of the similarity of 

 the bark and the seed. The seeds are black and tuberculated like in the Anhalonium with the form of 

 a Phrygien bonnet and a basilary hilus. Take a flower, bark and seed of the M. conoidea, separate it 

 from the trunk of the plant, place at its side the flower, bark and seed of the Anhalonium 

 prismaticum et sulcatum, seprated from the plant in a similar fashion, and you will not be able to 

 find an important difference.The difference exists only in the aspect exterior of the plant and its 

 inflorescense. 



Another species from the basin of the Rio Grande, but of which I find no mention in your 

 publications and which I described under the name of Mamillaria (coryphanta) chlorostigma 

 {Mamilaria Pottsii Scheer) with an exterior similar to the_with grooved mamilae, vertical flowers, 

 small ciliated sepals and petals of a dirty white color and a purpuric median line, purple stamen, 

 yellow antennae, green Stylus and Stigmata, with ovoid stem, (first green and later red). As I was 



IUI IUI 



m — — — J 





0 1 



cm 



2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 

 Copyright reserved 



Missouri 

 Botanical 

 Garden 



