Since the publication of Hunt et al. How- ever, conservation assessments are not yet available for these recently recognised species. Also, to date, a molecular phylogenetic hypothesis of Eulychnia is lacking. As a conse- quence, species delimitation and relationships in Eulychnia are still under discussion. Pinto Popu- lations of all four Chilean Eulychnia taxa occur in protected areas Table 3. The Peruvian species is not protected in situ, nor is it present in a seed bank. All Eulychnia taxa are currently held in living collections by botanic gardens Table 3.
Figure 4c reveals that Germany, the United States of America and the United Kingdom are the countries with the highest percentage of botanic gardens holding ex situ collections of the genus Eulychnia. Other countries with sizable living collections of Eulychnia are Chile, Belgium, France and Switzerland.
The four endemic Eulychnia species recognised in Hunt et al. No records of the endemic Peruvian Eulychnia species were found in Peruvian botanic gardens G. Botanic garden accessions: quantity and quality For the data of the Chilean botanic gardens, one collection corresponds to one accession. Most taxa are represented by a small number of individuals generally ca. Little information is available about ex situ collections of E. Although the proportion of well-documented collections detailed collecting data: e.
Kattermann's most important contribution to cactus taxonomy to date was his revision of the genus Eriosyce2, published in Eriosyce, a mostly Chilean. Eriosyce (Cactaceae): The Genus Revised and Amplified (Succulent Plant Research) [Fred Katterman] on bottmesakalas.ml *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
This information is not included in the PlantSearch database and was obtained through direct contact with the botanic gardens. The response to our inquiry was relatively good. A total of 1, accessions of Copiapoa, accessions of Eriosyce and accessions of Eulychnia were included. Figure 7 shows the number of accessions according to their origin. Dark grey collections of known wild origin. Light grey collections of horticultural or unknown origin.
Eleven species occur both in in situ protected areas, and are present in seed banks and in living collections i. These 11 species can be seen as the currently best-protected taxa. Two species occur in protected areas and are held in living collections C. Another six species lacking in situ protection are present in both living collections and seed banks [C.
According to Guerrero et al. However, although this area of high endemism including several Copiapoa, Eriosyce and Eulychnia species is meant to become a national reserve e. Of the three remaining Copiapoa species, two are only present in living collections inside Chile, and one is present in living col- lections both in and outside its country of origin. Although conservation efforts should be focussed on the taxa that are most at risk of extinction e.
Guerrant et al. For example, of the 11 species conserved both in situ and ex situ, only C. In contrast, of the four CR species, C. Also, two of the EN species are not present in in situ conservation areas see Table 1 for details. However, while we also treat the taxa that Hunt et al. Because of this, many taxa previously assessed as threatened in e.
Hoffmann and Walter , as well as in the assessments of the Chilean MMA are lumped at species level resulting in the loss of important information. Furthermore, based on recent field observations, the IUCN RL assessments of a few species appear somewhat counterintuitive.
The Cactus Handbook. Seller Rating:. Forgot your username? Eriosyce cactaceae the genus revised and amplified Kattermann,Fred. Field Guide to the Pitcher Plants of the Philippines. Ritter Backeberg Neoporteria esmeraldana F.
This is the case for two Copiapoa species, C. Contrarily, other species with similar areas of distribution are categorised as either CR or EN Table 1.
It is true that, in contrast to most other narrowly endemic species, C. However, the species is not currently protected in situ and has high ornamental value for collectors. Moreover, its dis- tribution area is well known, not at all inaccessible in contrast to what is stated by Saldivia et al.
Therefore, although a species, which is abundant and not currently declining, cannot be categorised as threatened according to the IUCN RL criteria, we suggest reassessing the RL category of this species at regular intervals in order to ensure that any changes in its status are noticed in time to prevent grave consequences. Again, this species is not protected in situ. In situ and ex situ conservation of Eriosyce in Chile A little over half of the Chilean Eriosyce species Table 2 have populations that occur in protected areas E.
These species are also present in seed banks and present in living collections. Another species, E. Another nine Chilean Eriosyce species are included in both seed banks and garden collections, but do not occur in protected areas. Two Chilean species only occur in living collections E. As with the Copiapoa species, the in situ and ex situ conservation efforts are not clearly focussed on priority taxa for conservation based on the RL assessments. For example, E. The other Eriosyce species given CR status, i. In situ and ex situ conservation of Eriosyce in Argentina Of the five Argentinean Eriosyce species, two are present in in situ protected areas as well as in seed banks and living collections; one is protected in situ and available in a living collection in Argentina.
The two other species only occur either in a seed bank or in living collections outside its country of origin. Again, for the Argentinean species the conser- vation efforts are not focussed on the most threatened taxa see Table 2 for details , with E. In situ and ex situ conservation of Eriosyce in Peru One species encompassing three subspecies occurs in Peru, i. However, it is unclear which subspecies occurs in that area since this dis- tribution does not concur with the distribution data of the subspecies as given by Hunt et al.
Also, the distribution area of E. More detailed information on these Peruvian taxa is needed. The Peruvian taxon, Eulychnia iquiquensis subsp. However, it is present in living collections outside the country of origin see Table 3 for details. Con- sidered as a separate species, E. When looking at the pre- sence of taxa in living collections, clear differences are noticeable between the three genera.
Copiapoa is better represented in botanic gardens, while a more limited number of botanic gardens hold smaller collections of Eriosyce. Eulychnia, a genus of only four species, is relatively well-represented in botanic gardens, although with generally only very few individuals as they are quite large plants. The same pattern exists in the living collections of these genera in the two public botanic gardens in Chile, where most Copiapoa taxa and all Chilean Eulychnia taxa are present, compared to only 10 of the 27 Chilean Eriosyce species.
In general, the number of accessions in living collections, even of the most commonly cultivated taxa, is too low to allow effective ex situ conservation of the genetic diversity of these taxa.
To conserve genetic diversity, ex situ collections should consist of many different individuals from several populations e. Walters Per species, up to 50 individuals of up to 50 populations should be collected to capture sufficient genetic variation Brown and Marshall ; Guerrant et al.
Despite other opinions e. This difference might be explained by the relatively high number of amateur cactus enthusiasts travelling to South America who brought back collections that even- tually ended up in botanic gardens, compared to the lower number of introductions of rare tree species. The latter were often the result of a single individual or a handful of plants brought to Europe by professional plant hunters. For example, Squeo et al. However, to this day only 1.
Figure 8 shows the protected areas in Chile. Here the type locality or the area of major abundance of each of the Copiapoa, Eriosyce and Eulychnia species occurring in Chile was mapped. The figure shows that although the protected areas are defined to include as many species as possible, for most species their area of major abundance is not inside a protected area.
Besides the fact that quite a number of sub species are not yet protected in situ, several Eriosyce species have very low population estimates i. More efforts should be taken to protect these taxa in situ, and include them with priority in seed banks and possibly cultivation and restoration projects. Urgent investigations are needed to confirm whether E. If some individuals remain, these should be protected, their genetic diversity secured and included in conservation and recovery projects.
For this action to be successful, more information is needed concerning the remaining populations, and the genetic diversity and ecology of this species. Moreover, for taxa like C. Other species could also become threatened in the near future. Species with small distribution areas see Tables 1, 2, 3 like C. As mentioned before, mining is economically very important for Chile, and has an impact on large parts of the distribution area of the three studied genera. Some legal instruments are already in place to limit the negative effects of mining and other activities, e.
However, conflicts still occur between ecological and economic interests. For example, according to Faundez et al. Furthermore, one of the most common threats to the continued survival of the natural populations of cacti in the north of Chile is drought. Desiccation of plants seems to results from droughts influenced by climate change, but is aggravated by mining operations in the area since this industry uses a lot of water in order to extract minerals from the bedrock e.