Help . Cycad i.d. time.

[Gas man]

I recently  picked up a bunch of small cycads. The person wasnt postive what they were. He was thinking natalensis, gratas, lembomboensis, or manikensis.   I got about 40 of them.  These 2 pics are of different plants . I noticed in the 2nd pic that the top of the leaf has less spikes then the plant in the first pic. 

[Merlyn]

On 7/9/2020 at 8:37 PM, Gas man said:

I recently  picked up a bunch of small cycads. The person wasnt postive what they were. He was thinking natalensis, gratas, lembomboensis, or manikensis.   I got about 40 of them.  These 2 pics are of different plants . I noticed in the 2nd pic that the top of the leaf has less spikes then the plant in the first pic.

Yikes, 40 at once!  There are a lot of different leaf types in the Manikensis "Alliance" and I've had a hard time telling a lot of them apart.  See the below chart for the mess of subspecies allied to Manikensis.

Your top photo looks like it could be a Natalensis, the photo is a little blurry but the leaf shape and spines look reasonably close.  Once the leaves finish flushing it should be easier to tell on that one.  Frequently Natalensis leaves are broader than your photo, but I'm not sure that's a positive ID method.

The lower pic could be Aemulans or Lebomboensis, they usually have 2-3 big spines on the bottom and only 1 or 2 small ones on the top of the leaf.

@Tracy has helped me ID some of my uknowns.  Any ideas?

[Tracy]

1 hour ago, Merlyn2220 said:

Once the leaves finish flushing it should be easier to tell on that one.  Frequently Natalensis leaves are broader than your photo, but I'm not sure that's a positive ID method.

Yes, once the leaves finish flushing it will be easier, but still not easy as you point out in your chart.  Once one enters that manikensis complex its like going into a corn maize:  very difficult to navigate or get one's bearings.  In that I'm only growing a few of those, I'm not as familiar with the distinctions.  Add to the mix that some look different as juveniles than as adults and things get more complicated.  If there are hybrids in the mix, all bets are off!

[GeneAZ]

First image looks like E. lebomboensis typical form.

[tropicalb]

i wouldn't worry about it too much...you'll have a much better idea what it is when it cones, so ....plant that sucker!

[Tracy]

37 minutes ago, GeneAZ said:

First image looks like E. lebomboensis typical form.

Gene is probably right as I compare leaflets of the one above and the one I have which is the

 

1 minute ago, tropicalb said:

i wouldn't worry about it too much...you'll have a much better idea what it is when it cones, so ....plant that sucker!

female coning below. 

[Merlyn]

21 hours ago, Tracy said:

Gene is probably right as I compare leaflets of the one above and the one I have which is the female coning below.

Great plant!  If you get a chance, can you post a closer photo of a couple of "typical leaves?"  I don't have a decent photo of Lebomboensis leaves in my files. 

[Tracy]

1 hour ago, Merlyn2220 said:

Great plant!  If you get a chance, can you post a closer photo of a couple of "typical leaves?"  I don't have a decent photo of Lebomboensis leaves in my files. 

It may take a little time.  I was just over at the house working on a project for the tenants over the weekend, but I try not to disturb them too much.

[Tracy]

I looked back and found these older shots of the same cycad so you don't have to wait for me to get over there.  Photos from 2012, 2013 and 2017 in order of Encephalartos lebomboensis.  Now you have young plant, flushing, coning size and female coning photos of this species.

[Merlyn]

14 hours ago, Tracy said:

I looked back and found these older shots of the same cycad so you don't have to wait for me to get over there.  Photos from 2012, 2013 and 2017 in order of Encephalartos lebomboensis.  Now you have young plant, flushing, coning size and female coning photos of this species.

Awesome pics and plant, thanks!