So that plant is a monstrose form of the actual plant so probably should have its own entry with 'monstrose' or a cultivar name added. If this gets added to the actual regular entry for the plant it will be highly confusing as the regular version of the plant does not look like that.
Also, I am not sure how long it will take to be reflected in the CoL, but afaik Trichocereus has been reinstated by the committee/working group that deals with cactus nomenclature in the last few years. For example in the latest version of the New Cactus Lexicon this plant is now called Trichocereus lageniformis. Not sure why they did not go back to Trichocereus bridgesii, but they did not.
Anyway, the last bit is not really that pertinent to the discussion here, just giving people a heads up as to what might be coming...
