History of Astrophytum myriostigma subsp. tulense Kayser
1932 Viereck reports about a revolved, columnar, snow-white form of Astrophytum myriostigma which he found near Tula. KAYSER, K. (1932): Astrophytum myriostigma subspecies Tulense, Der Kakteenfreund 1 (6): 58
1932 Original description of Astrophytum myriostigma subsp. tulense by KAYSER, K. (1932): Astrophytum myriostigma subspecies Tulense, Der Kakteenfreund, 1 (6): 57-59
1960 Recombination to Astrophytum myriostigma subvar. tulense by Backeberg. BACKEBERG, C. (1960): Die Cactaceae, Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, page 2660. This classification as a sub-variety by Bakeberg is difficult to understand, because Astrophytum myriostigma is a species and Backeberg don't explain which variety from myriostigma the Tuala plant should be subordinated. This dilemma Walther Haage solves by another error, quoting Backeberg wrong "...Astrophytum myriostigma var. tulense (Kayser & Backeberg)..." and creating a new variety: HAAGE, W. (1981): Kakteen von A bis Z, Neumann Verlag, Leipzig-Radebeul, page 27
1979 Sadovsky und Schütz raise up Astrophytum myriostigma subvar. tulense to a new species Astrophytum tulense: SADOVSKY, O.; SCHÜTZ, B. (1979): Die Gattung Astrophytum Flora-Verlag, Titisee-Neustadt: 159-160. No expert or botanist followed this opinion for understandable reasons till now.
1990 Hoock, H. holds the opinion that Astrophytum myriostigma subsp. tulense (Kayser) and Astrophytum myriostigma v. columnare (Schumann) are identical. This means that Astrophytum myriostigma v. columnare has the priority. HOOCK, H. (1990): The Myriostigmas of San Antonio, Brit. Cact. Succ. Journ. (GB), 8 (3) 68. Also Viereck came to the same conclusion: VIERECK, H. W. (1939): Astrophyten, wie sie der Sammler in den Heimatgebieten sieht Beiträge z. Sukkulentenkunde Jg. 1939 (1): 6
descriptions
Astrophytum myriostigma subsp. tulense
home