General Information   |   Species   |   Hybrids   |   Cultivars   |   Unidentified species

CHICLENSIS var. CANTAENSIS   Pino & Vilcapoma, 2018

Type : Vilcapoma 4722, collected on slopes of La Viuda mountain range, road to San Miguel de Pumacoto, Dist. San Buenaventura, Prov. Canta, Dept. Lima, Peru, 2650 m, Apr 9, 1998.


Etymology : Referring to the Prov. of Canta in the Chillón River Valley where it was first discovered


Distribution : This variety occurs in the three valleys north of the city of Lima, always at lower places (1700 – 3100 m) than var. chiclensis. In Huaura and Chancay Valleys it grows at even lower altitudes than var. backebergii (2000 – 2600 m).


A summary of Pino’s description :


Glabrous, solitary or rarely proliferous.


Stem subterranean, 2 – 8 cm long, with constrictions caused by annual growth.


Rosettes 12 – 20 cm in diameter.


Leaves 10 – 14, first lanceolate, later narrowly oblong, slightly incurving at tips, 6 – 13 cm long, 1 – 2 cm wide at widest part (middle), 3 – 6 mm thick, upper side concave to flat or canaliculate, light glossy green.


Flowering stem a raceme, 25 – 60 cm long, whitish green below, reddish above, bracts numerous, evenly spaced, 2 – 5 cm long, 8 – 13 mm wide, light green, flowers (4-) 6 – 12, pedicels 1.5 – 2 mm long.


Flowers : Sepals spreading at right angle or up to 45°, 5 – 10 x 2.5 – 4 mm, green, corolla pyramidal to prismatic, 1.2 – 1.3 cm long, petals reddish-orange to yellowish outside, yellow inside, apex slightly recurving.


Flowering time October to May.


Note :


In his article : The varieties of Echeveria chiclensis (Crassulaceae), an endemic Peruvian species (Haseltonia  9: 51-61, 2002), Pino determined this plant as var. chiclensis. In the meantime enough data became available to describe it as a new variety. The leaves of the three varieties of E. chiclensis are very similar in shape, however those of var. backebergii differ in the minute transparent papillae on the surface. The main difference between the three varieties is in the size and shape of the flowers. Var. cantaensis has the smallest flowers and it could easily be mistaken for E. andicola.

First published in Cactus & Succulent Journal US 90(3): 179-184, 2018.

< back