It is hard to make Lithops hybrids, at least across species barriers, and certainly hard to come up with anything worthwhile. Here are some possible hybrids that may simply have selfed, and also some definite hybrids.
This is a cross between L. helmutii and L. naureeniae. It could just be a regular L. naureeniae, although it does have quite a glassy appearance.
This is a cross between L. dinteri and L. schwantesii var marthae. Again, not far from regular var marthae although with quite prominent red dots.
This is L. lesliei 'Albinigold' crossed with L. lesliei Kimberley Form. Not green, but a bit yellowish compared to the parent Kimberley Form.
This is a cross between L. otzeniana 'Aquamarine' and 'Cesky Granat'. Most are slightly greener than the regular species, except for one which is distinctly redder although it browns out more quickly than a true 'Cesky Granat'.
The top plant here is L. julii 'Fullergreen'. The bottom two are crosses between it and L. salicola 'Malachite'. Regular 'Malachite' plants aren't especially green, but the hybrids aren't really any better and could even be selfed.
This is xDinterops, a cross between a Lithops and a Dinteranthus. Definitely not selfed offspring of either parent.
And this is a pretty reliable hybrid, albeit within L. gracilidelineata. Steven Hammer crossed 'Cafe au Lait' with ssp brandbergensis to come up with some interesting intermediate forms. It has been published as 'Brandcafe'. These are young but the one on the right shows the sort of thing to hope for.
Lithops hybrids
Forum rules
For the discussion of topics related to the conservation, cultivation, propagation, exhibition & science of cacti & other succulents only.
Please respect all forum members opinions and if you can't make a civil reply, don't reply!
For the discussion of topics related to the conservation, cultivation, propagation, exhibition & science of cacti & other succulents only.
Please respect all forum members opinions and if you can't make a civil reply, don't reply!
- iann
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 14565
- https://www.behance.net/kuchnie-warszawa
- Joined: 11 Jan 2007
- Branch: MACCLESFIELD & EAST CHESHIRE
- Country: UK
- Role within the BCSS: Member
Lithops hybrids
Last edited by iann on Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Cheshire, UK
-
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 2321
- Joined: 13 Feb 2009
- Branch: SOUTH WALES
- Country: UK
Re: Lithops hybrids
Hybrids or not Ian. You have done well, some beautiful and well grown plants. Thanks for the pics.
- rodsmith
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: 17 Feb 2011
- Branch: STOKE-ON-TRENT
- Country: UK
- Location: Staffordshire, UK
Re: Lithops hybrids
Ian, Your xDinterops has the look of the L otzeniana pattern.
Rod Smith
Growing a mixed collection of cacti & other succulents; mainly smaller species with a current emphasis on lithops & conophytum.
Growing a mixed collection of cacti & other succulents; mainly smaller species with a current emphasis on lithops & conophytum.
- Aiko
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 3869
- Joined: 12 Aug 2010
- Branch: None
- Country: Netherlands
- Role within the BCSS: Member
Re: Lithops hybrids
Lithops hybrids, that is still a big mist to me (but maybe a few distinct ones). Especially the many green ones, they all look alike to me and I don't really see why they all need different names. Seems some Lithops enthousiasts are getting out of control creating and then naming more and more hybrids...
- KarlR
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 635
- Joined: 13 Oct 2014
- Branch: None
- Country: Norway
- Location: Kristiansand, Norway
Re: Lithops hybrids
Lovely plants, Ian! Well-grown Lithops are really enjoyable to look at.
I've never grown a lot of Lithops myself, being more of a cactus only kind of guy, though I am planning to grow a few more mesembs and other succulents in the future. They really are such interesting plants.
I do wonder though how many Lithops species we'd be left with if they were given the Hunt et al «lumping treatment». Seems to me that there are species and subspecies for just about any small morphological variation. Is this notion just a result of me being too inexperienced with Lithops to realise that the differences are actually significant, or am I right in believing the number of species and subspecies should be reduced (at least in terms of their botanical value?).
I've never grown a lot of Lithops myself, being more of a cactus only kind of guy, though I am planning to grow a few more mesembs and other succulents in the future. They really are such interesting plants.
I do wonder though how many Lithops species we'd be left with if they were given the Hunt et al «lumping treatment». Seems to me that there are species and subspecies for just about any small morphological variation. Is this notion just a result of me being too inexperienced with Lithops to realise that the differences are actually significant, or am I right in believing the number of species and subspecies should be reduced (at least in terms of their botanical value?).
Re: Lithops hybrids
I thought the same thing and looking at the name I wonder, Ian, if you may have posted the wrong file. (xotzeniana-0790.jpg)rodsmith wrote:Ian, Your xDinterops has the look of the L otzeniana pattern.
- iann
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 14565
- Joined: 11 Jan 2007
- Branch: MACCLESFIELD & EAST CHESHIRE
- Country: UK
- Role within the BCSS: Member
Re: Lithops hybrids
Forum software messed up again (internal image names do not match actual image names). I've edited the post, pictures should go with the correct captions now.
Cheshire, UK
- iann
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 14565
- Joined: 11 Jan 2007
- Branch: MACCLESFIELD & EAST CHESHIRE
- Country: UK
- Role within the BCSS: Member
Re: Lithops hybrids
There is certainly potential for lumping Lithops, but the reasons why it hasn't been done are well-known and widely-accepted. The very difficulty of crossing any particular pair of Lithops species speaks to their being well-differentiated.
Infra-specifically, Lithops subspecies are defined (following Cole) where the two forms are reliably distinct but close enough to be the same species. Varieties are used where two forms (or populations) are differentiable en mass but individuals are not reliably distinct. The species, subspecies, and varieties named by Cole are already a dramatic lumping of the previous situation.
Genetic studies have indicated that the traditional species groupings are partially the result of convergent evolution and apparently similar Lithops are not necessarily the most closely-related. Also, Lithops is not monophyletic with respect to Dinteranthus. No name changes have been made, partly because the DNA studies are quite tricky as Lithops show little divergence in the traditional markers used for such studies so relatively new techniques have to be used.
There are only a handful of Lithops hybrids in widespread cultivation, and perhaps widespread is being generous even to those. With the exception of the hybrids with Dinteranthus, I can't think of any that I'd recommend except to the most dedicated completionist.
Here is one more hybrid, deliberately made to produce a yellow flower on an apparent L. optica 'Rubra'. L. herrei and L. optica are likely to be very closely related and one of the top candidates for species lumping, despite having different coloured flowers which has traditionally been seen as a very strong dividing line among Lithops species (a dividing line that isn't supported by the DNA studies).
Infra-specifically, Lithops subspecies are defined (following Cole) where the two forms are reliably distinct but close enough to be the same species. Varieties are used where two forms (or populations) are differentiable en mass but individuals are not reliably distinct. The species, subspecies, and varieties named by Cole are already a dramatic lumping of the previous situation.
Genetic studies have indicated that the traditional species groupings are partially the result of convergent evolution and apparently similar Lithops are not necessarily the most closely-related. Also, Lithops is not monophyletic with respect to Dinteranthus. No name changes have been made, partly because the DNA studies are quite tricky as Lithops show little divergence in the traditional markers used for such studies so relatively new techniques have to be used.
There are only a handful of Lithops hybrids in widespread cultivation, and perhaps widespread is being generous even to those. With the exception of the hybrids with Dinteranthus, I can't think of any that I'd recommend except to the most dedicated completionist.
Here is one more hybrid, deliberately made to produce a yellow flower on an apparent L. optica 'Rubra'. L. herrei and L. optica are likely to be very closely related and one of the top candidates for species lumping, despite having different coloured flowers which has traditionally been seen as a very strong dividing line among Lithops species (a dividing line that isn't supported by the DNA studies).
Cheshire, UK
Re: Lithops hybrids
It is not because you cross 2 species of Lithops that you make hybrids systematically
Lithops are little subject to hybridization between them
Lithops are little subject to hybridization between them
- KarlR
- BCSS Member
- Posts: 635
- Joined: 13 Oct 2014
- Branch: None
- Country: Norway
- Location: Kristiansand, Norway
Re: Lithops hybrids
Thank you for the explanation, Ian! Really appreciate it. Very enlightening too