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

Mysterious Yard
Cart, empty
TBM 2.0 seal. monstrose growth.

Other genus

TBM 2.0

Partially documented

2.0 is a heavily mutated cactus sold from about 2024 under a name that borrows the reputation of the monstrose. Growers on the wiki page do not think it is one: comparisons run to a monstrose Mammillaria and to a monstrose , and one member notes that a plant disfigured by witches' broom looked the same. The name is best read as a sales label, and the plant's actual identity is unresolved.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.

  • extreme monstrose
  • no defined ribs
  • disputed identity

Other genusNursery selection: A selection a nursery or seed house put a name on and sold.

Of the 10 things this page says, 2 name who reports them and 8 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

Not recorded

No botanical name on file. What the sources do say about its species is in the writing below.

Filed under Other genus

Parents

Not recorded

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

Origin

The clone appeared in the collector market around 2024, mostly through vendors on Reddit.

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

In the yard

Not in the yardAsk if you are after one

Family line

what the record holds

No source in this library records a cross for TBM 2.0. 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

Species, as our sources record it: sold as a bridgesii monstrose, but the wiki page says the classification is disputed and probably not Trichocereus at all.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.

Plants were sourced from Chinese exporters already carrying the name TBM 2.0.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.

No breeding programme is documented behind it, and the wiki page treats the name as a marketing label rather than a botanical one.Reported, but not confirmed.

Where the name comes from

The appeared in the collector market around 2024, mostly through vendors on Reddit.Reported, but not confirmed.

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.

Skin
Green.One source states this, and our house botanist has checked it. Green stems are the norm for the genus and nothing here is implausible.
Growth habit
Extreme and irregular - globular or knobbly lumps without defined ribs or normal spacing.One source states this, and our house botanist has checked it. Loss of defined ribs and areole order into knobbly lumps is exactly what monstrose growth in this genus looks like.

What the sources say

Three separate identifications are floated on the wiki page - a monstrose Mammillaria, a monstrose Echinopsis tubiflora, and abnormal clustering caused by a witches' broom infection - and none is settled. Our own notes separately record a clone believed on one channel to be a monstrose Mammillaria rather than a bridgesii successor, so this is a recurring pattern rather than a one-off.Reported, but not confirmed.The wiki page is bot-compiled and unverified.Too little stands behind this for us to confirm it.

Drawing of a plain column in a dashed outline, standing for a plant our sources do not place.
A cactus from another genus column, drawn. We don't grow this one, and we will not borrow anybody else's photograph of it.

Filed under the same family, Other genus. 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.