Painting of L. julii subsp. fulleri var. brunnea © Jim Porter and reproduced with kind permission. Brief additional notes to the Cole Lithops monographs by Keith Green. Introduction An abridged version of these notes was published over three issues by the BRITISH CACTUS AND SUCCULENT SOCIETY in their journal CACTUS WORLD, in December 2007, March 2008 and June 2008. This is the complete, unedited project. The following notes evolved from my intention to provide an update (without any duplication) to Professor DESMOND T. COLE’s original Lithops monograph - LITHOPS FLOWERING STONES, published in Randburg, Republic of South Africa by Acorn Books in 1988. An attempt was made to briefly document all of the subsequent discoveries within the genus, with emphasis on the originating source. I gave consideration to every “new” Lithops I saw mentioned (the vast majority of which were termed cultivars) and documented, further researched and where possible obtained photographs of those I considered worthy of the rank afforded them. Over the years I therefore amassed quite a reasonable number of entries. Early in 2003 I learned through the pages of the M.S.G. Bulletin that Professor Cole was going to update his work and have a second edition Lithops monograph published. Subsequently I was able to make contact with Professor Cole, and I sent him a rough copy of these (then embryonic) notes hoping that they would be of some assistance to him in compiling his new book. Although he and Naureen kindly mention my help on p. 11 of ‘Cole’05’, I learnt a great deal more from the Coles’ than they could ever have learnt from me! Professor Cole’s reply (which included some Lithops seed) was most informative. He pointed out that mere appearance on a seed list or such like does not count as valid publication of a new plant. Only when properly published in accordance with the INTERNATIONAL CODE OF BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE does a new plant become valid (or indeed in the somewhat less exacting INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE FOR CULTIVATED PLANTS become “established”). Somewhat paradoxically though, the Coles’ Lithops research has highlighted doubts that historically all the relevant conditions of the Botanical Code have always been met. This point is highlighted in the Classification section of these notes. Taking Professor Cole’s guidance into account, I further rechecked my sources and revised my format, initially splitting these notes into four sections, which were as follows: Introduction, Classification, New Lithops post ‘Cole ‘88’ and Hybrids. The publication of DESMOND T. & NAUREEN A. COLES’ second and updated Lithops monograph – LITHOPS FLOWERING STONES published in Italy by Cactus & Co. in 2005, accordingly necessitated a 5th section called (rather unsurprisingly): New Lithops post ‘Cole’05’. A few lines at the beginning of each of these sections explain the general theme. Although it has been my experience that many unpublished and un-established Lithops names have been advertised for sale by various sources, I expressly decided against a section on taxonomic errata. Suffice to say that in all such cases I have found these names (usually advertised as cultivars) to be synonymous with taxa already recorded within the Coles’ monographs or subsequently within these notes. I venture that any name pertaining to be a Lithops that does not appear in the Classification list of this project be treated with suspicion, and carefully researched. Although academically unqualified in botany, Professor Cole stands as the undoubted world authority on Lithops, and I view his two monographs (the second of which was co-written with his wife Naureen) as fundamental to the understanding of this fascinating genus. The quality benchmark of the 1988 Lithops monograph later served to lay the foundations for the superb 2005 revision, which is now unquestionably the ultimate Lithops publication. By comparison these amateur companion notes pale into insignificance, but none the less it is my hope that fellow Lithops enthusiasts will find them of some help and amusement. Acknowledgements Even a short set of notes like these could not have been put together without help from many other people, to who I send my thanks. Special thanks go to Desmond and Naureen Cole, as without their extensive field research in the first instance these notes would be impossible and pointless. They have also been readily forthcoming with help, advice and guidance on all aspects concerning my understanding of Lithops. Thanks too to Steven Hammer who has been instrumental in the discovery, production and reporting of "new" Lithops. He further discusses some of these in his book LITHOPS TREASURES OF THE VELD that was published by the B.C.S.S. in 1999, and I have indicated the plants concerned in the text. Despite his fame throughout the succulent world his readiness to enter into dialogue with “unknowns” such as I is a credit to him. Even though we do not share a common language Mr. Shimada of Japan too has been of great assistance. He produced an excellent reference book called THE GENUS LITHOPS that was published in Japan in autumn 2001. The text is mainly in Japanese, but even for those un-educated in the language the photography is quite stunning. With help from his son Norihiko and Ms. Miyako Tannowa as translators we have shared knowledge and plants. Thanks also to fellow growers: David Blythe, Jonathon Clark, Lindsey Deaves, Will du Toit, Vincent Formosa, Francois Hoes, Tim Jackson, Kevin Mason (especially for his efficient delves into his archives), Petr Pavelka, Jim Porter, Terry Smale, Bernd Schloesser and Willie van der Westhuizen for information, communication, friendship, photographs and plants, and to Suzanne and Tony Mace for their stoic efforts with the Mesemb. Study Group. Finally, thanks to my family. To my father Charles, for introducing me to succulent plants at the age of 5 years; to my mother Louisa, my wife Debra and my two sons Christopher and Clive (who also took some of the photographs) for support, academic help and tolerance. Abbreviations used throughout this text include:- A (type cv) = "instances of white flowers in M.S.G. = Mesemb. Study Group species which are normally yellow flowering" (‘Cole‘88’ p. 83). M.S.G. Bulletin = Quarterly publication of the M.S.G. ‘acf’ = aberrant colour form p. = page B.C.S.S. = British Cactus and Succulent Society pp. = pages (more than 1) Botanical Code = INTERNATIONAL CODE R (type cv) = instances of unusually red OF BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE coloured mutations. C = Cole (Lithops colony) number R- (type cv) = instances of unusually red coloured mutations the “-“ sign having been ‘Cole’88’ = D.T. COLE, LITHOPS – added in ‘Cole ’05’ to describe cultivars with FLOWERING STONES (1988) aberrant colour forms. ‘Cole’05’ = D.T. & N.A. COLE, LITHOPS - ‘Shimada (2001)’ = YASUHIKO SHIMADA – FLOWERING STONES (2005) THE GENUS LITHOPS (2001) Cultivar Code = INTERNATIONAL CODE subsp. = subspecies, subspecies OF NOMENCLATURE FOR CULTIVATED PLANTS var. = varietas, variety cv = cultivar vol. = volume G- (type cv) = "instances of plants which lack W- (type cv) = "instances of white flowers in their normal pigmentation and have an species which are normally yellow flowering" unusually green or yellow green basic colour" (‘Cole‘88’ p. 83) the letter being changed and (‘Cole’88’ p. 83), the letter “Y” having been the “-“ sign being added in ‘Cole’05’ to dropped and the “-“ sign being added in ‘Cole describe cultivars with aberrant colour forms. ’05’ to describe cultivars with aberrant colour forms. Y- (type cv) = instances of yellow flowers on normally white flowering Lithops (‘Cole’05’ p. ‘Hammer (1999)’ = STEVEN A. HAMMER - 67). LITHOPS TREASURES OF THE VELD (1999) YG (type cv) = "instances of plants which lack their normal pigmentation and have an I.S.H.S. = International Society for unusually green or yellow green basic colour" Horticultural Science (‘Cole’88’ p. 83). I.S.I.J. = International Succulent Institute Japan * = invalid, unestablished or excluded name, number or status. L. = Lithops All photographs reproduced with permission of the © holders. Text and author photographs © Keith Green (2008). Lithops Classification In this project I have tried to maintain the Cole Lithops classification system whilst adhering to the INTERNATIONAL CODE OF BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE and the INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE FOR CULTIVATED PLANTS as closely as possible. It should perhaps be noted that the rules governing cultivar publication in general are less exacting than the rules that govern publication at the higher “botanical” ranks (e.g. variety, subspecies, species etc.). In response to a question I had previously posed him, Professor Cole sent me a fax dated 17th July 2005 in which he stated: “You are right, publication of cultivars has less stringent conditions than formal taxa, for example no Latin diagnosis is required. However, there are rules which must be adhered to”. The Coles’ emphasise theirs is not a botanical study, and raise doubts that some of the taxa included in their research has ever actually been correctly published in full accordance with the Botanical Code (see p. 4 of ‘Cole’88’ & p. 6 of ‘Cole’05’). It would obviously be preferable that every Lithops so thoroughly described and designated within the Coles’ research project had been accorded publication that exactly met the requirements of the Botanical Code, and whilst I know for a fact that all botanical Lithops taxa published by Professor Cole have met all the laid down conditions, it is possible other authors may not have been so diligent. The publication of ‘Cole’88’ however, provided a “clear and solid foundation” (p. 5 of ‘Cole’05’) for botanists, taxonomists or horticulturalists to study and correct. Along similar lines 8 cultivars were published in ‘Cole’88’ on the basis of single specimens that strictly speaking did not conform to the Cultivar Code, where replicable groups of plants are required.