HikeArizona.COM

I wanted to link my picture to the fauna, but I didn't find it or any of it's names listed in this excerpt that I cut and pasted:

This intricately branched, spiny shrub or small tree has no leaves -- just thick, rigid, sharp branches, which perform photosynthesis. The Crucifixion Thorn is bluish gray-green in color and can grow up to 10 feet tall. Young branches are covered with very short, fine hairs; older branches are streaked with gray-brown bark. The very sharp thorns at the ends of branches are either lighter or darker than the stems.
There are 2 other desert plants that are sometimes called Crucifixion Thorn, but botanists usually reserve the name for this member of the Quassia Family (Simaroubaceae). This plant is sometimes called Holocantha

Let me know . . .

You guys don't have Holocantha

The Holocantha virus? Well I would certainly hope not... Is it fatal?

we have crucifixion thorn. its all over the upper sonoran desert. ive seen it in the Supes, along the Verde Valley and apparently the true crucifixion thorn (chaparro amargosa) is used to treat intestinal nasties, including giardiasis.

I think the problem here is that several shrubs are referred to as Crucifixion Thorn.

The plant most commonly called Crucifixion thorn is "Canotia holacantha Torr." which is listed under Canotia. I hadn't heard it called Holocantha but I do see that Stan Tekiela in "Trees of Arizona" shows that it is sometimes called Holocantha or Chaparro Amargosa.

I may be mistaken, but I understood that "Holocantha emoryi" in the family Simaroubaceae was now properly referred to as Castela emoryi and called Emory Crucifixion Thorn. I know that Kearney & Peebles in Arizona Flora on page 495 refer to Holocantha, but the book was published in 1951 and some of the taxonomy has changed. This book is almost as old as me.

Provide me with a reference and I can add it. I'm not sure how rigorous DesertUSA is for a reference. They refer to quassia as a family instead of a genus of Family Simaroubaceae

We faced some dilemmas and decisions when we set up the flora and fauna sections between scholasticism and practicality - clarity and confusion if you will. We are hikers not botanists. At first we did not even show the Latin names, but since several plants have the same common name, Joe linked the Latin names into the indices. You will notice that we have "master files" for agave and century plant because of confusion.

We are taking your suggestion under advisement. I'm not sure if we can decide this at our next Flora Section Executive Committee meeting or if we need a meeting of the whole Flora Section committee. It has been hard to get a quorom at our Committee meetings since Joe cut our budget and we had to change venue from Trader Vic's to Taco Bell.

Al_HikesAZ wrote:Provide me with a reference and I can add it. I'm not sure how rigorous DesertUSA is for a reference. They refer to quassia as a family instead of a genus of Family Simaroubaceae

Can't be that rigorous if it is still using the antiquated Linnean system and not a cladistic approach with stem and node groups and proper clade names. ;)

I added Holocantha as an aka ("also known as") under the Crucifixion Thorn flora. You can add you photo. I will add commentary about the different types. This is consistent with the treatment of Century Plants.

Al_HikesAZ wrote:This is consistent with the treatment of Century Plants.

I almost pulled the trigger on the big Agave reference at Bookman's. I'm still kicking myself.

Wow, Al Hikes AZ, thank you for responding! I am apparently incredibly under informed because I had no idea I should look under Canotia because I've only ever known what to call it based on what I've heard others say. For instance, you said

Al_HikesAZ wrote:The plant most commonly called Crucifixion thorn is "Canotia holacantha Torr." which is listed under Canotia.

Now I know to call it Canotia & I can label my picture, Thank you So much!

p.s.

I, also, am afraid I am doomed to be forever hopelessly confused about agave v.s. yucca & century, etc. - - - glad to hear I'm not the only one!

Hi- I know im late to the discussion but id like to clear something up
there are 3 plants in arizona that are known as the "crucifiction thorn"

Depending on what part of the state your in may refer more to the local variety.

Now you all see to know Canotia and Castella emoryii, but there is a 3rd variety of crucifiction thorn more comonly found down south.
Koebralinia spinosa which is in the Capparaceae family.

keep hiking wrote:Hi- I know im late to the discussion but id like to clear something up
there are 3 plants in arizona that are known as the "crucifiction thorn"

Depending on what part of the state your in may refer more to the local variety.

Now you all see to know Canotia and Castella emoryii, but there is a 3rd variety of crucifiction thorn more comonly found down south.
Koebralinia spinosa which is in the Capparaceae family.

Thanks. I tend to think of K. spinosa as a Texas plant since I am a mostly north of Gila guy, but you are absolutely correct. Looking at Kearney & Peebles:

Western Texas to Southeastern Arizona and Northern Mexico. Greenlee, Graham, Gila and Pinal Counties and from Cochise County west to near Tucson. 2,500 to 5,000 feet.. . . Var. tennuispina . . . occurs farther west in western Maricopa and Yuma counties, also in southeastern California and northwestern Sonora. Normally it differs from the typical plant in having longer and more slender branches, bluish-green rather than yellowish-green bark, longer and narrower sepals, and longer petals and filaments. . . prefers sandier soil and grows at lower elevations 2,000 feet or lower. The plant is usually more open and taller.

I show it in the Koeberlinaceae (Junco) family instead of the Capparaceae family.

I will note it in the Crucifixion Thorn description. But much like Century Plant, I will leave the specifics undifferentiated.

ps - no one with wisdom and knowledge is ever late to the discussions around here. ;)