I know that work is being done within different sections of the database and I'm curious about the The Epiphyllum Database I wonder whether listings could be more cohesive ... or maybe they just appear incohesive to my eyes because of the different common names for the genus Epiphyllum. I don't have questions about the species but rather the cultivars, which are currently listed as one of the following:

Epiphyllum
Epicactus
Hybrid Epiphyllum
Orchid Cactus

To have more consistency, should each cultivar be listed as Epiphyllum 'Such and Such' rather than some showing up as Epiphyllum, others as Hybrid Epiphyllum, others as Orchid Cactus, and still others as Epicactus? Or would that make it more difficult for someone to find the plant in the database if they only know the plant as "Orchid Cactus" or "Epicactus" rather than Epiphyllum? I noticed that the majority of the cultivars in our database are listed as Hybrid Epiphyllum and I'm assuming it's because that common name either got the most thumbs up ... or as new plants, they were created with that name and no other common names were listed? I noticed that some of the listings show three or four common names while others may show just one or two; for instance:

Orchid Cactus (Epiphyllum 'Cherokee Sunset') - lists common names of Hybrid Epiphyllum, Orchid Cactus and Epicactus but no thumbs up have been given for any of the names so Hybrid Epiphyllum shows up from when the plant was created?

Epicactus (Epiphyllum 'Teki') - there are no common names listed so it shows up as Epicactus. Is that because that's how it was originally entered as a new plant and there are no other common names listed?

Orchid Cactus (Disocactus x hybridus 'Ackermannii') - all three common names are listed but it shows up as Epicactus instead of Hybrid Epiphyllum; because there are more thumbs up for the name Epicactus?

Orchid Cactus (Epiphyllum 'Jesse's Dream') - there are no common names listed so I'm assuming this particular plant was created with just the name Orchid Cactus? Should the other common names be added?

None of the following show common names and must have been created as just Epiphyllum:
Epiphyllum 'Curly Locks'
Epiphyllum 'Moonlight'
Epiphyllum 'Fred Boutin'
Epiphyllum 'Pete's Snowflake'

Should the common names (Hybrid Epiphyllum, Epicactus, Orchid Cactus) be added to all of those that don't currently show them? I'd be happy to take the time to go through and enter the common names to any that don't already have them listed.

Sorry about being so wordy; at times I have trouble writing what my brain is thinking but recent discussions with another member had me browsing Epiphyllum again and wondering if we had a particular database moderator or member who is knowledgeable about this genus and could maybe clarify things.

Another question; should there be a link on this page to all Epiphyllum entries? The Epiphyllum Database

I can automatically add a common name to all the plants in the Epiphyllum genus. We'd just need to decide what name we want to use and I can make it happen.

I like Epiphyllum.

The entire database is like that, scattered different common names pop up for various genus.

I agree with Sue!

The only two common names that I've known for Epiphyllum are:
Orchid Cactus (being the most common here in the U.S.A.)
Epicactus (I think this one is common to gardeners in the U.K. and Australia.)

When doing a google search, I also found the following common names listed at Wikipedia but I've never heard them used:
Climbing Cactus
Leaf Cactus


Randomly browsing our database, some Epiphyllum have been given the common names of: Epiphyllum - being the Genus but it's my preference and I guess could also be considered the common name.

All three of the following are used in our database but are confusing; I'd think just using the cultivar name with Epiphyllum would be sufficient:
Epiphyllum Hybrid
Hybrid Epiphyllum
Hybrid Orchid Cactus

I don't have anything to do with the Epiphyllum Database, but in general I prefer not to have the genus name as the common name. To me, that just seems to be a needless duplication of data. The genus name will always be displayed and is searchable. Better to use whatever the most common name is as the common name and if there isn't one, just leave the field blank.