Other genus
Glorp
Partially documentedGlorp is a cactus — a mutation that grows in lumps and swirls instead of tidy columns — isolated by grower James Peterson, who is said to have kept it weird by off every normal shoot until the plant could only grow from mutated tissue. It onto a wide range of . Worth knowing before you buy: the community wiki files the name twice, and the second entry places it in , not .Reported, but not confirmed.
- monstrose growth
- irregular ribs
- melted stems
- grafts widely
At a glance
Species
Filed under Other genus
Parents
No source names a mother or a father for this one.
Origin
no source says whether it is seed-grown or a cutting line
In the yard
Family line
No source in this library records a cross for Glorp. Nobody names a mother or a father for it, and no other entry here names it as a parent.
The longer version
Species, as our sources record it: the page names no species; a second wiki page files the same as Myrtillocactus geometrizans monstrose c.v. Glorp.Reported, but not confirmed.
Peterson is reported to have stabilised it by trimming away every piece of normal growth, so the plant could only pup from mutated tissue.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.
A second wiki page dates the find to about June 2018 and says the mutated section was spotted inside a large, otherwise ordinary landscaping planting.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.
That second page identifies the plant as a monstrose form of Myrtillocactus geometrizans, the blue candle cactus.Reported, but not confirmed.
James Peterson found this plant and grew it on separately, dating the find to roughly June 2018.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.
Peterson spotted it as a small patch of monstrose growth inside a large, otherwise ordinary stand that was part of somebody's landscaping.Reported, but not confirmed.
Peterson took a piece of that growth away, isolated it and gave it the name Glorp.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.
Where the name comes from
Grower James Peterson found and isolated the clone.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.
Character
Not documented yet.
Not documented yet.
Not documented yet.
- Ribs
- ribs, spines and skin colour: nothing beyond the monstrose habit has been recorded.Our house botanist's reading of this: Every source, including the one listing less detail, agrees the plant grows monstrose; only the genus filing is disputed.
- Growth habit
- It is a monstrose form of the Blue Candle cactus, which is the whole basis of the selection.Reported, but not confirmed.
- Notes
- Growth is lopsided and distorted, with irregular ribbing and uneven areole spacing.One source states this, and our house botanist has checked it. Lumpy, irregular ribbing and uneven areoles are exactly what monstrose growth looks like in columnar cacti.Skin ranges from blue-green with a waxy bloom through to deep green.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.The mutation throws bulbous or melted-looking stem sections and irregular spines.One source states this, and our house botanist has checked it. Bulbous, melted stem sections with irregular spines are exactly how monstrose growth presents in this genus.Peterson reported finding no rootstock it refuses, so it takes on the usual grafting stocks.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.
What the sources say
The clone page never states a genus, while a second wiki entry files the same cultivar name under Myrtillocactus geometrizans.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.The community wiki carries the name on two pages and only the longer-titled one names the genus, which is why this entry sits outside Trichocereus even though the wiki files it with the clones. The species comes from the landscaping stand the monstrose patch was cut out of, not from what the mutant looks like, which is the only sound way to identify growth this deformed. The name itself is a published one.Reported, but not confirmed.
Related names
Keep exploring
Cultivar histories in this hobby are passed between growers; where sources disagree we say so rather than pick a side.