deciphering an old label

[Kees]

Cameas might be Carminea or Caineana or Cardenas the botanist?

[ralphrmartin]

I think it's KK1816, Paul. The last digit would be too small as a '0', but could easily be the bottom part of a '6'. And Ralph's database gives this as M. colorea - but unfortunately Mila colorea. Any chance that M. colorea is actually Mediolobivia, not Mila, Ralph?

Good question. Christophe Ludwig's field number list also gives it as Mila colorea, so it's not just me making some silly blunder, and there is such a thing as Mila colorea described in F.Ritter, Kakteen Südamerika 4: 1341 (1981). As Paul says, the given locality in Peru agrees with it being a Mila; Mediolobivias don't come from there.

When I looked at the label, I fancied the first word might be Sulcorebutia - so perhaps the label faded on one side and the original owner wrote another name on the other side?

As far as I can see, the word Cameas does not occur anywhere in the field number database.

[ralphrmartin]

Here's the full KK list (click the left-hand panel link, I can't link directly) - see what you think https://web.archive.org/web/20060426203 ... knize.com/

There are various versions of KK's list in existence, supposedly from KK himself, and they are not all in agreement with each other. So don't be surprised if you find KK numbers which differ from this list.

[Tony R]

Good question. Christophe Ludwig's field number list also gives it as Mila colorea, so it's not just me making some silly blunder, and there is such a thing as Mila colorea described in F.Ritter, Kakteen Südamerika 4: 1341 (1981).

Yes, for information, these are the data for Mila colorea (Ritter 699) from Eggli's 'The Ritter Collections:

[Kees]

I have taken a closer look at the first letter of the second line.
It looks like a downward stroke with a dot in the middle.
Looking at other letters it looks like the beginning and the end of a stroke are preserved as a dot.
So the 1st letter might as well be a P or a B. E or F are less likely as there are no dots left of the horizontal strokes.
2nd line 3rd letter from the right: couldn't that be a T?

[Paul D]

I have taken a closer look at the first letter of the second line.
It looks like a downward stroke with a dot in the middle.
Looking at other letters it looks like the beginning and the end of a stroke are preserved as a dot.
So the 1st letter might as well be a P or a B. E or F are less likely as there are no dots left of the horizontal strokes.
2nd line 3rd letter from the right: couldn't that be a T?

Thank you all for your efforts.
I've managed to enhance it further in the evening light. Although the top line is not clear in this pic, I've got that line sorted. As you can see, the second line is much clearer now- first letter definitely a c.

Unfortunately I think Ralph may be right, and this could be a re-used label on the reverse, without scrubbing off the old info. I do have a KK1810 (Sulcorebutia) from the same source (JRK), though it has its own label.