Range and cultivated forms
The natural range includes Puerto Rico and part of the Leeward Islands. In Cuba, the 2023 account classifies C. rubescens as naturalised rather than native. Plants have been recorded there in Granma, La Habana, Mayabeque and Matanzas, among other places. A site's origin matters when describing the flora and assessing the spread of garden plants. [2-WWW] [Barrios et al. 2023]
The genus key highlighted the less pronounced relief of the segment surface, with rounded or elliptical raised areas, and reddish young growth. A nearly spineless form is widespread in cultivation. Majure and coauthors did not use this form to reconstruct the genus's original armament because it does not represent the full variation of wild plants. [Areces-Mallea 2001] [Majure et al. 2021b]
Propagules and chromosome number
The Cuban review described reproduction through seedless fruit acting as propagules. The persistence and growth of such a structure do not establish successful fertilisation. Vegetative propagation may explain the presence of many plants of a particular clone despite limited seed formation. [Barrios et al. 2023]
In the 2007 study, plants from Puerto Rico had 2n = 88. The analysis included male and female material, and differences in sexual function were not attributed to different chromosome numbers in these two groups. Studies of flower development showed tapetal changes associated with the absence of pollen in functionally female flowers of this species. [Negrón-Ortiz 2007] [Strittmatter et al. 2006]
Why absence of feeding does not establish resistance
The abstract of Pemberton and Liu's 2007 paper reports no attack by Cactoblastis cactorum on C. rubescens at the sites studied on Nevis and Saint Kitts. The experiment by Jezorek and coauthors in 2010 identified this species as one of the better hosts for larval development under no-choice conditions. The findings address different questions. [Pemberton and Liu 2007] [Jezorek et al. 2010]
A field observation depends on whether the insect reached the plant and laid eggs. A no-choice trial assesses whether a larva can develop on the host provided. In the second study, egg-laying preference did not closely match host quality for larvae. For this reason, C. rubescens was not described as resistant to the pest solely from the absence of feeding in one field survey. [Jezorek et al. 2010] [Pemberton and Liu 2007]
Synonyms and names in the literature
Consolea catocantha · Consolea guanicana · Consolea moniliformis subsp. rubescens · Opuntia catocantha · Opuntia guanicana · Opuntia rubescens [2-WWW]