CANALICULATA Hooker f., 1857 (engl./ fr.)
MOST LIKELY NOT IN CULTIVATION, PROBABLY NEVER REDISCOVERED IN THE WILD.
Synonyms :
Cotyledon canaliculata (Hooker f.) Baker (1869)
Echeveria rubescens Lemaire (1857) (nom. inval. Art. 34.1c)
Series Racemosae
Type : Mexico. Said to have been “from the Real del Monte mountains of Mexico”, Hidalgo, but probably this was only the shipping point; ?1845, Frederick Staines s.n.
Holotype : t. 4986 accompanying the protologue. The only known element of the original material, and therefore autotype.
Etymology : Referring to the channeled leaves.
Distribution : Said to have come from Real del Monte, ?Hidalgo, but it has never been collected there again.
First Description by Hooker in Curtis's Botanical Magazin, vol. 83, t. 4986 + text, 1857:
Stem short, thick, between fleshy and woody, erect, marked with the scars of fallen leaves.
When not in a flowering state, all the leaves are rosulate, crowded, patent, four to six inches [10 - 15 cm] long, oblong or somewhat strap-shaped, thick, fleshy, tapering gradually upwards into a very slender almost filiform point, deeply channelled above, semiterete beneath, glaucous but much tinged with purple.
Flowering stem or branch elongated, one and a half to two feet [45 - 60 cm] high, its lower leaves the same as the rosulate ones, the rest are placed far apart (yet numerous), of the same shape, but smaller than the rest, with a gibbosity or blunt spur at the base beneath (not dilated like the rosulate ones), gradually passing upwards into small, very glaucous, oblong-obtuse bracteas. Raceme a span [19 cm] or more long. Pedicels half an inch [12,5 mm] or more long, with a few minute subulate bracteoles.
Flowers : Calyx of five, equal, linear-lanceolate, patenti-deflexed, glaucous sepals, much resembling the bracteas. Corolla nearly an inch [2.5 cm] long, rather bright brick-red, orange within. Petals five, erect, close-placed, united at the base into a short dilated five-angled tube, the segments linear-lanceolate, the apices moderately spreading. Stamens quite included, five inserted at the base of the corolla, five smaller ones a little higher up. Anther oblong. Ovaries five, narrow, oblong, subcoadunate : at the base of each is a conspicuous, suborbicular gland, with a depression on the upper side. Styles slightly twisted. Stigma globose.
n = unknown
Note :
1. The description by M. Kimnach in Illustrated Handbook of Succulent Plants, 2003, is unusable because it is partly based on plants collected in Oaxaca, recently almost certainly identified as E. uxorum.
Therefore the indicated cytology : n = 44 most likely also refers to E. uxorum, which means that the cytology of E. canaliculata is not known.
2. According to M. Kimnach, 2003, plants collected at Motozintla, Chiapas, by Tom MacDougall, have never been verified.
3. Plants collected at La Margarita N of Presa Miguel Alemán, Oaxaca, most likely are E. uxorum and not E. canaliculata.
4. Pilbeam wrote (The genus EcheveriaT, p. 66, 2008) : “The nearest relative to this species is the better known E. atropurpurea … possibly coming from the Mexican state of Veracruz, but its origins are uncertain.” As already indicated for E. atropurpurea, this plant - described by Baker with no data of origin – so probably a hybrid – is lost to cultivation since a very long time – therefore it is certainly not “well known”.
Pilbeams distribution reports are wrong and the photos figs. 48 & 49, p. 66, are wrong, too, they most probably show E. uxorum not E. canaliculata (suggested by the authors of E. uxorum).
5. The ISI distribution of 1980 has been wrongly named.
6. The photos by Jerónimo Reyes Santiago & Christian Brachet on www.crassulaceae.com are wrong : The leaves are not glaucous, the pedicels are far too short - the description says 12.5 mm or more- , the corolla is too short, should be 2.5 cm long and its colour should be brick-red. Obviously their photos show E. uxorum.
7. Conclusion : None of the plants circulating under the name E. canaliculata correspond to this species. The Mexican origin of E. canaliculata is unknown and it seems that it will remain unknown as the plant obviously has never been found again in the wild.