Dear Jane, Thank you for the summary of what you saw recently on the north central portions of the Chilean coast. I was curious as to whether you had come across Rhodophiala laeta and R. uniflora in Antofagasta Province. You said you saw the former. Any images to be forthcoming? Flowers in their environment are always so much more exciting. It must have been exciting to see the deep blue form of Tropaeolum azureum. By rare bulbs I was referring to those that appear at long intervals in unusually wet years. Last year the area around Copiapo and further north had 400% of normal rainfall. It is unusual for two years in a row to have high rainfall. Of course, even 400% does not mean a lot fell in a region where rain may not come at all in several years. Bulbs and plants from the area are indeed of interest to me and, as you point out, to others in Southern California. Andrew San Diego In reply to Andrew's questions -- >As the >one who pointed out here the early high rainfall in the Atacama a few >months ago I would love to hear how far north you ventured. Rains in >that area are very rare, possibly inducing the appearance of bulbs not seen for any years. >Did you go as far north as Copiapo, or even as far north as Antofagasta? >Cacti such as Eulychnias amd Copiapoas and even some bromeliads persist >in those regions . If you went up there did you find rarely reported bulbs? We went as far north as Paposo (just north of Taltal). We had thought to go to Antofagasta but found lodging in Taltal so didn't have to drive so far. Paposo is a famous botanical "hot spot," which I had visited without knowing that at the time, in the previous moist year, 2002. I was in the area in 2008, not a moist year, and saw almost no bulbs or annuals in flower in the north, except a few Rhodophiala bagnoldii in a drip-irrigated olive grove. We also stayed in Copiapo, and we visited most of the notable parks and national monuments on our itinerary, as well as drives and walks described in "Flora nativa de valor ornamental, Zona Norte." I don't know about "rarely reported" bulbs, because the bulbous plants of the area are well known and not very numerous in terms of species, but I think we did see all the amaryllids we could expect in bloom, and a few of the earlier Alstroemeria species. It was a little early to see cacti in flower but there were a few just opening, in the genera Eriosyce, Eulychnia, Echinopsis, Copiapoa, and Cumulopuntia (I think I may still have a thorn of the last in my calf). Bromeliads seen were Puya chilensis, P. coerulea, and Deuterocohnia chrysantha. We were able to photograph a lot of color variation in Rhodophiala ananuca and R. bagnoldii, and also the less variable R. phycelloides and R. laeta. Also spectacular and variable were Leucocoryne coquimbensis, L. purpurea, and Zephyra elegans. Other geophytes seen included Tropaeolum tricolorum, T. brachyceras, T. azureum (very deep color forms), Oziroe biflora, Pasithea caerulea, Leucocoryne appendiculata, Pabellonia incrassata, Trichopetalum plumosum, Aristolochia chilensis, and Placea amoena. These mingled with a great number of colorful annuals and flower-covered sclerophyll shrubs, as well as cacti. For members like Andrew who live in southern California, not only these bulbs but also the annuals would be a terrific garden resource. One rarely sees, for example, the showy blue Nolana species or the annual Solanum species grown in gardens, but they're obviously quick to produce large, floriferous specimens. Jane McGary Portland, Oregon, USA