User Tools

Site Tools

Trace: • William Baker
clones:t:tbm_2_0

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
clones:t:tbm_2_0 [2026/07/03 00:45] – gate contributor confidence to trusted groups (@trusted_grower/@admin) clonebotclones:t:tbm_2_0 [2026/07/03 03:36] (current) – gate discussion/citations/confidence/credibility sections to trusted groups clonebot
Line 13: Line 13:
 No specific cultivation details were provided in the community discussion. As a suspected monstrose cultivar, standard care for sensitive cacti should be applied: utilize a highly mineral, well-draining soil mix (at least 50-70% pumice or perlite) to prevent root rot. Provide bright, filtered light and water only when the substrate is completely dry. If grafted, follow the specific cultivation requirements of the chosen hardy rootstock. No specific cultivation details were provided in the community discussion. As a suspected monstrose cultivar, standard care for sensitive cacti should be applied: utilize a highly mineral, well-draining soil mix (at least 50-70% pumice or perlite) to prevent root rot. Provide bright, filtered light and water only when the substrate is completely dry. If grafted, follow the specific cultivation requirements of the chosen hardy rootstock.
  
 +<ifauth @trusted_grower,@admin>
 ===== Community Discussion & Citations ===== ===== Community Discussion & Citations =====
 The community consensus strongly suggests that "TBM 2.0" is not a true *Trichocereus*. Multiple experienced growers have noted its striking resemblance to other known monstrose cacti, such as *Mammillaria* "Fred" or monstrose forms of *Echinopsis tubiflora* (sometimes referred to as *Echinopsis* "chocolate"). Some members also noted that its growth pattern resembles the abnormal clustering caused by phytoplasma infections (witches' broom), though it is more likely a stable genetic mutation of a non-Trichocereus species. The community consensus strongly suggests that "TBM 2.0" is not a true *Trichocereus*. Multiple experienced growers have noted its striking resemblance to other known monstrose cacti, such as *Mammillaria* "Fred" or monstrose forms of *Echinopsis tubiflora* (sometimes referred to as *Echinopsis* "chocolate"). Some members also noted that its growth pattern resembles the abnormal clustering caused by phytoplasma infections (witches' broom), though it is more likely a stable genetic mutation of a non-Trichocereus species.
Line 21: Line 22:
 | 2024 (approx) | Henrique Nogueira | "Someone recently had a penis cactus that had witches broom and it was identical to tbm 2.0" | | 2024 (approx) | Henrique Nogueira | "Someone recently had a penis cactus that had witches broom and it was identical to tbm 2.0" |
  
-<ifauth @trusted_grower,@admin> 
 ===== Contributor Confidence ===== ===== Contributor Confidence =====
 //Visible to trusted reviewers only.// //Visible to trusted reviewers only.//
Line 29: Line 29:
 | Andrea Rossi | 7/10 | | Andrea Rossi | 7/10 |
 | Henrique Nogueira | 7/10 | | Henrique Nogueira | 7/10 |
-</ifauth> 
  
  
 ===== Credibility Notes ===== ===== Credibility Notes =====
 Zac Parker and Andrea Rossi were assigned confidence scores of 7 due to their specific botanical comparisons and identification of the commercial origin of the clone. Henrique Nogueira was rated 7 for providing a specific pathological comparison to a TBM infected with witches' broom, offering a plausible explanation for the clone's highly irregular growth form. Zac Parker and Andrea Rossi were assigned confidence scores of 7 due to their specific botanical comparisons and identification of the commercial origin of the clone. Henrique Nogueira was rated 7 for providing a specific pathological comparison to a TBM infected with witches' broom, offering a plausible explanation for the clone's highly irregular growth form.
 +</ifauth>
clones/t/tbm_2_0.1783039509.txt.gz · Last modified: by clonebot