Echinocereus viridiflorus var. russanthus

Echinocereus russanthus ssp. russanthus

Peter Berresford offered some valuable thoughts on the present state of this taxa:

   "On the "russanthus" issue....

   There are 3 "camps" - how you classify Section Echinocereus (which contains all the green or small brownish-red, lateral flowering plants within the genus) depends on which camp you hail from. At the two extremes are: Mike Powell (Cacti of the Trans-Pecos and Adjacent Areas) and Der Echinocereenfreund.

   Powell has everything as a ssp of viridiflorus (2004/2008) except the Coahuilan "carmenensis" - if this grew in Texas I am sure he would recognise it as a viridiflorus ssp!

   Der Echinocereenfreund (2012) go to the other extreme. Here we have 2 ssp of viridiflorus: viridiflorus and corellii, 3 ssp of russanthus (the species) : russanthus, fiehnii and weedinii, 2 ssp of chloranthus (the species): chloranthus and rhyolithensis and all the rest as species in their own right. Interestingly they have subsumed E.  viridiflorus ssp cylindricus into E. chloranthus. This taxa represents what I think is a grey area between E. chloranthus and E. viridiflorus which I would differentiate from the smaller growing "viridiflorus". Examples of viridiflorus ssp cylindricus can be found, for example, on the access road up to the McDonald observatory. They lack the comparatively longer spination of E. chloranthus but are larger than E. viridiflorus.

   Camp 3 contains Taylor & Hunt (2013 The New Cactus Lexicon). This group follows Powell but still include the taxon "viridiflorus ssp cylindricus”. They do not recognise carmenensis, canus, milleri, blumii or fiehnii. Needless to say "russanthus" is included as a ssp of viridiflorus.

   Where do I stand? Mostly with Der Echinocereenfreund on this. Sad to say I would disregard "mega-lumpers" as in The New Cactus Lexicon - for me their ideas just do not stack up with what is out there!"