Possibly Lepismium cruciform var. myosurus.

See link below

Here is a link that might be useful: scroll to name given above

Based on the pot, I'm guessing that this is an "Exotic Angel" brand plant. The only thing they mention on their site that resembles your plant is Lepismium cruciforme.

Hi Rob,

I see you started a new thread for this today, pls. give folks a chance to respond. Like a couple of days at least. If you'd like an ID, one needs to give it a bit of time, to allow enough time for folks to respond. Kindly do not start a new thread 'cause it's not happening fast enough.

You might also try the Epi Forum (not on GW, but I don't knwo where); maybe give that a few days at least.

This is a forum for anyone to ask question RIGHT !!!

Thanks for the reply from everyone and I believe it is lepismium cruciforme I didn't mean to confuse anyone with the 2 post so sorry again but I'm still learning to use the forum thanks Rob

Dont feel bad Rob. I post ID stuff on here and get NO replies, quite often actually. Dont know if what I happen to get from these box stores are so rare that no one can help me out or what. I started my C/S collection last year and I have realized that having the correct names for my plants is quite important. I only post on here when my other methods fail. This is a last ditch effort here, seeing as my posts hardly get responses. I think you did what any other human being in the hunt for correct names would do. I think its a beautiful plant and I dont mind seeing it twice.

Steve

Plant_junkie , Thanks alot for the kind words if I ever can help or see your message on this forum I will answer if I can
Thanks alot Rob

hey Rob, i ditto everything plant_junkie said. don't feel bad or be discouraged. there is A LOT of experience and knowledge on here and it's the best place to get a succulent ID'd. and i agree with Norma, it looks like you have a Gasteria verrucosa.

Bri.

FYI Bri,
I believe the Gasteria you're giving an ID on, is in another thread by another poster, johndoug. :P

LOL. oops, Rosemarie, you are absolutely right! thanks for pointing that out.

Rob, please disregard that last part.

Bri.

Steve,

Sorry if this offends you, but I have to say that your comments about often not getting responses are imaginative, as that's one word for them. No one's response goes more than a few days, I should think, without some sort of answer.

Jeff Im on the right forum, where we critize and nit pick,
That is what Spike used to do?. Is this what we are here for? It was obvious that some one posted a wrong response to the last question, no one needed to point it out, one person transposed letters so what, I was told that spelling was not important, and if you are the moderator please let me know if this is appropriate behavior. Please get us a spell check.
* K. Beharensis v. beharensis is the correct name for the plant and the complete name. * per Hermann Jacobsen Lexicon of Succujlent Plants. Norma

@cactusmcharris,
Im not offended at all. I was just sharing my experiences with getting ID's on GW. I have had many ID posts that have traveled to the bottom and off the page without an ID. I know that what I get at box stores cant be that rare that no one knows what it is or something close to it. Im not upset about it, i was just letting rob know that this happens and that I dont blame him for reposting. I know that not everyone can spend hours responding to post on GW everyday. I wanted him to know that there are other ways to get IDs or close IDs without using GW, like finding out who the grower is and finding their website. More often than not Ill get a post saying that they dont know what it is and then the post sinks off the page. GW, for IDs, hasnt been productive for me. Sometimes when you need something done you have to do it yourself. And thats what I have been doing so I dont get let down when my post dissapears to never be answered.

I truely appreciate everything everyone has done for me, I dont want to seem ungrateful. I have learned more about plants with my short time on GW than I have in the years prior. Without GW's endless info, Id be lost and scratching my head with my C/S are dying.

I dont want to give Rob the wrong idea about GW. It is indeed and endless well of knowledge and should be taken advantage of.

If my post offended anyone, I apologize, it was not my intention.

Steve

Just an additional note, Norma (& all)...when I point out something in a post (which may seem obvious to you & not everyone else), I believe I am being helpful. There have been many times when I've gone to a post & read something that didn't make sense to me at all. If I hadn't read the other posts on the page, I'd have no clue that what was commented on was in an entirely different post. I'd start looking back trying to find something I would think I somehow missed (& waste a lot of my time). Many times I'm scratching my head, asking myself, "WHAT are they talking about?"

And nitpicking about the spelling of plant names is important, IMO. (Who cares about the rest of your spelling, as long as it is understood what you're trying to convey.) The person wanting an ID (given a name) may go searching & never find the right plant because of a misspelled name. I also think it is helpful for people to correct when they are able.

[FYI, If you use Firefox for your browser, it has a built-in spellcheck.]

As for asking for help and not getting a response, or a quick one...I think this forum needs a few days for responses. On the flip side, I've answered queries here and never heard back from the original poster. You can never be sure if they came back for to check for replies.

Just trying to help!

Oops, I forgot...perfect example: you gave the correct name of the Kalanchoe plant here, Norma, when that plant is asked/discussed about in another post. Do you see how people on the forum can get confused without someone pointing out this stuff? :)

For me personally, I have to mention that I have had excellent results when I have posted a photo of a plant for ID. In my opinion, as Jeff has already stated, rarely have I seen a post go unanswered.

Christopher

Rob I looked up the name of the var. it doesn't exhist. I would like a reference from where that name was found? I think I phony name was put on the plant until I am proven wrong. I have the plant that was field collected and picture taken by Urgs Eggli can any one reading this prove me wrong, page 387 The Cactus Family by Edward F. Anderson.Copywrite 2001 I am writing about Lepismium criciforme. I want to know if there has been a name change or if a new one has been found, and where was it written? I am never again going to back down to any one on this forum again. You think you are picky about names well I am the worst, and now I will write about it if I find names wrong I will be petty, about names because I do believe they are important, and should not only be spelled correctly but applied to plants correctly. But should not be corrected or critized if we all know what is being written especially if we see that is just a typo error, I have been trained to be picky, and now I have permission to be so. I will continue to help those who ask for help, and those who don't need it don't open my post, because you all know it all. I look up every thing that I write, and be glad to write where the information comes from. That said, good night all. Steve and Rob, I'm sorry this came up, I don't get my questiion responded to also, because they don't know the answer. No one responded to my questions. No even recognized that I was responding to a question but quoted me. No one could decide on the Kalanchnoe, so I did my own research and asked the Director of the Huntington Gardens Director of the Cactus Collection. I found out I was right. He told me where to look, so you see we have help from experts not peple who quess, in Botanical Science a guess just will not quiet make it. Norma

What do you mean Norma? Lepismium cruciforme is an accepted species, so I guess you mean the variant myosurus. It is mentioned in the list of synonyms on the page you referred to, as Lepismium myosurus.

Sorry I guess I'm still blind after three surgerys syn don't coun't for me those are old obsolete names, which I don't use, the name that is now used in the oldest name that was legally published. I trust Dr. Anderson on his published names which are current. I thurst the Huntiington labels, being that it was collected by Myron Kimnach, and I feel they are current. Thanks for at least telling where it is published, the oldest published name is the one to be used. The name that you are using was published a few years later, that is why it isn't used.

The form originally named Lepismium myosurus was published as a separate species but later merged with cruciforme. I don't understand why the fact that myosurus was published later should prevent from being used at a lower taxonomical level (variety or form).

Anderson states that "Lepismium cruciforme is variable and a number of varieties have been proposed". He does not mention any of these varieties, but Anderson was a "lumper" and, more important, not an expert on South American epiphytic cacti, so it is fully understandable that he did not elaborate on the eventual varieties.