Crassula sarcocaulis - or not

[MikeT]

not all the leaves have a central groove, just most of them. The older, outer leaves seem to lose it, presumably they drop off first. The newest ones don't have a groove, either

That's much the same

Looking at yours, I would say it is the same as mine and I have no doubts that the large old one and the one originally called Crassula sarcocaulis are identical, they certainly look it

I agree

I would suggest that yours has been grown in a greenhouse, as it is paler than mine

Misleading, Liz, I think it's just the photo making the green look paler than it is. The plant's been outside all summer, hence the red tinge on many of the eaves
A new label with 'Sedum frutescens' seems in order.

Questions: Has it flowered and if so what are they like, what colour are they?

Is the plant quite brittle, do small bits break off very easily?

Mine's never flowered, which I would expect Crassula sarcocaulis to do at this size. The stems are brittle, in that it doesn't take a lot to break one off, but not as brittle as C. sarcocaulis which sheds bits quite easily, most of which then root. I find sarcocaulis hardy in Sheffield; even in the severe winter of 2010, although some plants died, others survived. They didn't like loads of snow falling onto them off the greenhouse roof. I've never noticed any scent/smell with sarcocaulis flowers, but as they're in the garden, it would be easy to miss.
Has your frutescens flowered, Suzanne? If so, what size? As mine's in a pot, it's never going to get to full size.
Ray Stephenson's Sedum book suggests that frutescens cuttings are hard to root; have you found that? Cuttings from the plant I have seem to root easily enough; maybe that will change if the label reads Sedum frutescens instead of Crassula sarcocaulis.

[Liz M]

Hi Mike, Sorry if I misinterpreted your photo, maybe it was taken with flash. I could see that it was red on the ends but it appeared such a light green. I find my Sedum frutescens pieces that break off so easily, root incredibly easily. I have about ten small plants at the moment. The bark on mine peels off constantly. I have not noticed flowers on mine. What do you have to do to make it flower I wonder? I hope our exchange has been some help to you. Until someone steps in with an entirely new name.

[topsy]

Hi Mike & Liz,

I have had my Sedum since it was quite a large plant, it is now approx 4 foot tall. I have never had any problems flowering it, they are white and small and tend to come from the ends of the parts which are growing strongly. It really does need a large pot in order to grow well and hence to flower. It needs plenty of water, but then if it is outside as soon as there is no danger of a frost this will not be a problem. It flowers earlier in the year, around May time.

The Crassula really does stink and I always have to have it outside because of that and still it is so detectable. I did have it planted on the rockery for a couple of years and even then it was very pongy. Had to rescue the plant from the rockery as the very wet winters were threatening to kill it off. I do find that the white flowered form is less robust. I also do not have bits breaking off the Crassula as they do with the Sedum. I think in the case of both plants it is a matter of giving them plenty of water and potting on regularly.

Have you ever tried writing on the papery bark of the Sedum?

Suzanne Mace

[kohinoor]

Ladies and gentlemen there is a possibility have't be proposed.

What if it is an unpublished new species ?

It's not the first time enthusiast have plant before the official Taxation study publish.
like Dorstenia horwoodii Pachypodium eburneum

There is even a plant right now have no name !

Didierea sp nova
https://www.out-of-africa-plants.com/pr ... f-trollii/

i know i am not helping. XD

[topsy]

I do not think that the ISI through Huntington Botanical Gardens would distribute a plant which had not been described, it would be against their remit.

Suzanne Mace

[Jim_Mercer]

I do not think that the ISI through Huntington Botanical Gardens would distribute a plant which had not been described, it would be against their remit.

Suzanne Mace

Looking through the corrections http://www.huntington.org/BotanicalDiv/ ... tions.html they do seem to distribute plants without complete names as well as wrong ones

[MikeT]

Ray Stephenson has confirmed that it's Sedum frutescens. He thinks it's big enough to flower next year - but that might be ignoring my cultivation techniques. I'll post a photo if it does manage to flower.

[ChrisR]

Looking through the corrections http://www.huntington.org/BotanicalDiv/ ... tions.html they do seem to distribute plants without complete names as well as wrong ones

Someone should tell them to add this one to the list

[Jim_Mercer]

Looking through the corrections http://www.huntington.org/BotanicalDiv/ ... tions.html they do seem to distribute plants without complete names as well as wrong ones

Someone should tell them to add this one to the list

I have sent them an Email with a link to this thread but had no reply so far

[Jim_Mercer]

Now had a reply from John Trager at Huntington which includes a picture of the plant with flowers

Hi Jim,

In response to your question about the true ISI 99-41, I located the original plants in our nursery and attach a couple of pictures here. It appears that there was a label switch at some point to Sedum frutescens, the plant illustrated in your BCSS discussion group.

All the best, John

John N. Trager
Curator of Desert Collections
Huntington Botanical Gardens