It's curious, Paolo - you are asking us what the cacti are, and yet you have it titled 'lophophora', so if I were an attorney, I'd have to say 'Asked and answered, Your Honour'.

Question being, diffusa or williamsii?

Paolo,

There you have me - I would guess that it's L. w. (thinking that L.d. is flatter) but I never grew enough to become cognizant of the differences. There are folks here who do know the difference, and I should think that they'll be chiming in.

BTW, that's a great potting arrangement - is the plant in the lower right from the same seed as the rest? Did you behead the mother to make it pup so profusely?

I just got all of them, just before I knew of the difference between williamsii and diffusa. However after looking at dozens of pics I still can`t tell wich is which.

Also, some of them are flowering so it would be useful to know what seeds I`ll end up with.

I know the bottom left is a Fricii and the mottom right is a variety of Williamsii because they came with a label that says so. The others I have no idea.

So there's got to be a story there - how did you get them and where did you get the pot?

I wish L. Williamsii was legal to own here. Of all the hallucinogenic cacti, they had to go and outlaw the cute, fluffy ones.

"So there's got to be a story there - how did you get them and where did you get the pot?"

I ordered them on the internet. L.Williamsii is legal here in Japan. The pots are the way they came.

Btw, I made a mistake earlier, the Fricii is the top one. This morning I woke up and I found a beautiful pink flower on it - this pic was taken yesterday. The large one one the right on the other hand now has a white flower.

You can see the small bottom left one was nearly flowering too but this morning the flower seemed to be half dead. I gave it some water. I don`t know if that will help.

Also, there doesn`t seem to be any soil in the pots. Only crushed rocks. Does this mean I should water them more often?

I see L.w. and L.f. there as you noted, but I'm not sure about the other ones. Someone on another forum where I linked your picture said that the lower right one might be a disputedly-named L. caespitosa - I remember one that had lots of offsets as being L. jourdiana, but my knowledge on Lophophoras is as thin as the taproot is thick.

Boku mo saboten ga suki desu yo. Demo, kono mono o yoku wakarimasen.

BTW, their names are correctly written Lophophora williamsii and Lophophora fricii.

From Wiki:

Lophophora has been reported to comprise everything from one species, L. williamsii with varieties, to the four species L. diffusa, L. fricii, L. viridescens, and L. williamsii. Most modern authorities consider Lophophora to be a genus of two species, L. diffusa and L. williamsii. Recent DNA sequencing studies (Butterworth et al. 2002) have shown that L. diffusa and L. williamsii indeed are distinct species. DNA evidence from the alleged species L. fricii and L. viridescens would allow for more accurate classification.

You should see this habitat picture, Paolo

Here is a link that might be useful: Rodent in situ

"Someone on another forum where I linked your picture said that the lower right one might be a disputedly-named L. caespitosa..."

Yes, the label says, Williamsii V. Caespitosa. I assume it belongs to the Williamsii family right? I know there`s a lot of confusion regarding this.

Anyways, interesting picture. I was reading an article somewhere on how animals purposely chew plant they know will get them high. I guess it isn`t just humans then.