The shop is closed just now. The shop is not open for orders yet. Everything here is real and grown in my own yard — have a look around — but I am not taking money until the last few things are in place. Ask about a plant

Fr991 seal. Plain ring: nothing here sets a rib count, a spine length or a growth form the ring can mark.

Scopulicola

Fr991

Partially documented

Fr991 is a collector's field number: a collected by Friedrich Ritter. That single line is the whole wiki entry, with no traits and no distribution history attached. The locality is on record elsewhere: a field-number database compiled from collectors' own lists puts the collection at Tapecua in Bolivia's Tarija department, between 1000 and 1500 metres.Reported by one source, and not corroborated anywhere else.Codes like this identify a collection rather than describe a plant, and knowing where one was made does not tell you that a sold under the number today came out of it.Reported, but not confirmed.

ScopulicolaField-collection code: A collector's accession number — initials and a number — rather than a nickname.

Of the 17 things this page says, 5 are things several independent sources agree on, 3 name who reports them and 9 are marked as something we cannot confirm. Where a line is not settled, it says so underneath.

Added 23 Aug 2026

At a glance

Species

Trichocereus scopulicola

syn. Echinopsis scopulicola

Filed under Scopulicola

Parents

Not recorded

No source names a mother or a father for this one.

Origin

The plant is recorded as a scopulicola collected by Friedrich Ritter.

no source says whether it is seed-grown or a cutting line

In the yard

Family line

what the record holds

No source in this library records a cross for Fr991. Nobody names a mother or a father for it, and no other entry here names it as a parent.

That is the record, not an oversight: of the 749 names in this library, 693 have no recorded relation either. Most named clones were selected, cut and passed along without anyone writing down what they came out of. A parent goes in here when a source states it and never because a name looks like one — a wrong pedigree would travel further than a blank one, because pedigrees get copied.

If you know where it came from, tell us — a person reads everything before it appears.

The longer version

A specialist reference attaches the number to Ritter's 1959 Bolivian expedition, to Tapecua in the Tarija department, and to the winter seed lists he sold the collection through — and calls it one of the commonest scopulicola strains in cultivation.Reported, but not confirmed.

A licensed Californian nursery growing this material since about 2010 records its own plant's label as reading FR991, Bolivia, and traces it to New Mexico Cactus Research.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.That is a second, independent record of the Bolivian origin and of the NMCR route, and it is a nursery's account of its own plant rather than of anybody else's.

Asked for Trichocereus scopulicola rather than for this number, the same index returns this collection and nothing else: two localities, one collector, no other numbered scopulicola from anybody.Reported by one source, and not corroborated anywhere else.That is why a single number carries so much weight on this species, and it is still not a statement about where any particular cutting came from.

A Californian nursery sets out how the number reached American collections: seed labelled with it was bought from a Spanish botanical garden by the New Mexico grower the entry above already names, about eight seedlings were raised, and cuttings came from the last one or two he kept back as . The same listing carries a doubt worth more than another agreement would be: it reports it as strongly suspected that the plants from that lot are not pure scopulicola but a made at the Spanish garden, argued from spines longer than on Australian and Continental material.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.That is presented there as speculation, and as a third party's account the nursery is passing on, and it is recorded here as both.Reported, but not confirmed.

A California nursery that grows it records how the number reached the trade, and that chain is a European one. Very little Bolivian scopulicola seed ever left the country, so most of what circulates was raised in Germany; the nursery says the original FR991 plants are likely to have died in a hard winter, and that Noll obtained seed from Joachim Podschadel before that collection was lost.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.

Two consequences the nursery states plainly. Plants sold as FR991 are seed-raised descendants rather than one , so more than one distinct plant travels under the number; and the collector's field record and the plants in gardens today are separated by at least a generation from seed.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.That does not contradict the field-number record this entry already carries — it is the step between the collection and the market.Reported, but not confirmed.

Where the name comes from

The plant is recorded as a scopulicola collected by Friedrich Ritter. The collectors' field-number record places the collection at Tapecua in the Tarija department of Bolivia, between 1000 and 1500 metres, and carries a second locality for the same number west of Palos Blancos in the same department.Reported by one source, and not corroborated anywhere else.

Character

A bar is drawn only where one of the lines below states it — never from the species, never from a photograph.

  • Not documented yet.

  • Not documented yet.

  • Not documented yet.

Nobody has described the skin, the ribs or the spines of this one anywhere we could cite, so there is nothing here to draw or to list.

What the sources say

No source we have found argues about this name — nobody has written that it is confused with another plant, or that two growers mean different things by it. That is worth knowing in itself.
Drawing of a scopulicola-type column: smooth-edged and glossy, with very few ribs, tiny areoles and no spines.
A Scopulicola column, drawn. We don't grow this one, and we will not borrow anybody else's photograph of it.

Filed under the same family, Scopulicola. The better-documented ones come first.

Keep exploring

Cultivar histories in this hobby are passed between growers; where sources disagree we say so rather than pick a side.