Growths solitary or 2-4 in a clump up to about 1 in. high, 13 in. broad, and 1 in. thick, flat at the top, which is either distinctly tuberculate or marked with a sort of network of slight furrows varying from light rusty-ochreous to a dark ironstone colour with the furrows of a darker tint, not spotted. Calyx unequally 8-lobed, stout, compressed; lobes 8–10 mm. long, 4–5 mm. broad, oblong or ovate-oblong, obtuse, green with reddish tips. Corolla about 1.5 in. in diameter; petals 50-60 in about 2 closely overlapping series, widely spreading, 6–8 lines long, about 1 line broad, linear, tapering towards the base bright yellow on the inner face, whitish on the back. Stamens collected into a column about 4 lines long; filaments yellow, fading into a white at the base; anthers orange-yellow; ovary slightly convex at the top; stigmas usually 6–7 (sometimes 5), finally 6–7 lines long and exceeding, and curving over the stamens, filiform, yellowish, capsule somewhat compressed, 4.5 to 6 lines in diameter, 6–7 valved. Seeds smooth, brown.
Prieska Division, at Zand Vlei, Burchell; Pole Evans. This species was the first that was discovered of these very remarkable mimicry and windowed plants, but as I have already given some account of its discovery and rediscovery on page 250, Vol. LXX, I need only add here that the above description was made from the living plants that were so generously sent to me by Dr. I. B. Pole Evans, and the figure is reproduced from a photograph kindly sent to me by Mr. T. N. Leslie. This figure represents the tuberculate form, but I also have other forms that are very much smoother with only a coarse network of slightly impressed lines upon the top of the plant. (Fig. 1.)
In his very interesting account of plant mimicry, Dr. Marloth (Trans. S. Afr. Phil. Soc., Vol. 15, p. 99), remarks that Burchell, “in his travels through the Karroo found a species of Mesm. which he named M. turbiniforme, thinking it to be undescribed”. As a matter of fact it was found by Thunberg, who had named it M. truncatum from the shape of its leaves. Dr. Marloth has in this been misled by Sonder’s union of these two species in the Flora Capensis. For not only are they two utterly different species, but one is a Lithops and the other a Conophytum, and grow about 200 miles away from each other.
(Note: M. truncatum is Conophytum truncatum, discovered by Thunberg, who never visited Prieska, where M. turbiniforme, as already mentioned, was discovered by Burchell. — G.C.N.)
I have included L. aurantiaca L. Bol. in L. turbiniformis, as there does not appear to be any difference between these two species. L. aurantiaca was sent to the Botanical Garden, University, Stellenbosch, by Triebner in 1930 In April 1932 it flowered and was then described by L. Bolus. In the description she states "crebre impressa rugosaque fere in more L. turbiniformis" but unfortunately she does not state in what specific point or points these two species are supposed to differ from one another. The original plants front which the description was made of L. aurantiaca were painted under the impression that L. aurantiaca was a distinct species. Plate 38a is the one referred to. When the question, however, of making a key came up, it was impossible to find any difference between L. turbiniformis and L. aurantiaca L. Bol. to warrant the upholding of the latter.
It is true that if reference be made to the photograph of L. turbiniformis, reproduced in Gard. Chron., Feb. 4, 1922, p. 55, Fig. 28, it appears that the tubercles are very prominent and definite; but my own experience of this species both in the field and in cultivation, is that one cannot attach too much importance to the degree of rugosity. The leaves, especially in the young stage, show a very prominent tuberculation, but towards the end of their life, the upper surface becomes smoother, the depressions (furrows) shallower until one has just more or less an indication of a more deeply coloured line.
At first I was at a loss to account for the appearance of L. turbiniformis in the Klinghardt Mts., hundreds of miles from Prieska, the nearest point, where this plant occurs, to the above mountains. Apart from this, the climatic conditions on the West Coast of South-West Africa are entirely different to those where the plant normally grows (Prieska, Britstown, Kraankuil). One of two explanations is possible: (i) If it does really grow in the Klinghardt Mts., then it is the only ease, where a species of this genus has so to say jumped hundreds of miles, and that is something quite unusual in this genus; (ii) the more plausible one is that W. Triebner must have made a mistake in the habitat of the plant he is supposed to have sent to the University of Stellenbosch. I am strengthened in this latter view by the fact that Herr Eberlanz, Lüderitzbucht, who knows that part of the country very well, wrote to me as follows: ”Ich kenne den Fundort von L. aurantiaca nicht, glaube aber nicht, dass diese Art aus dem Klinghardtgebirge stammt. Nach Professor Dinter, welcher 1923 dort sammelte, ist wohl kein Sammler dort gewesen. Da die Consolidated Diamond Co., dieses Gebiet hermetisch verschlossen hielt, besteht keine Möglichkeit dorthin zu gelangen.”
It appears that the plant No. 9180, which is time type, was sent by Max Schlechter, Port Nolloth, to Pastor Meyer. Steinkopf, who passed it on the University of Stellenbosch. That W. Triebner collected it seems to he a mistake. From the above it is quite clear that L. aurantiaca L. Bol. is identical with L. turbiniformis.
