SKU: 93808169714
indoor tall cactus plants

indoor tall cactus plants Large Peruvian Cactus

$19.28 $21.42
Save 10%
No.2 Bestseller on virtipatel.com >

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 13 - Jul 18

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

indoor tall cactus plants Large Peruvian CactusThe Peruvian cactus is tall, striking, and truly special. With its beautiful blue green columnar stems and magical night blooming flowers, this desert beauty has been winning the hearts of plant lovers since it first made its way from South America. This stunning flowering cactus isn't hallucinogenic (a mix up we often hear about!), but it does offer something even better colorful, edible fruits that taste like a delightful blend of kiwi and dragon

The Peruvian cactus is tall, striking, and truly special. With its beautiful blue-green columnar stems and magical night-blooming flowers, this desert beauty has been winning the hearts of plant lovers since it first made its way from South America.

This stunning flowering cactus isn't hallucinogenic (a mix-up we often hear about!), but it does offer something even better - colorful, edible fruits that taste like a delightful blend of kiwi and dragon fruit. The Peruvian cactus is wonderfully forgiving if you sometimes forget to water it, making it perfect for busy plant parents. With a steady Peruvian apple cactus growth rate of 1-2 feet per year, it'll gradually grow into an impressive 8-foot indoor statement piece that brings a touch of desert magic into your home.

Care:

What lighting does a Peruvian cactus need?

Your Peruvian cactus loves sunshine! It needs at least 6 hours of direct sunlight daily to really thrive. Try placing it near a south-facing window where it can soak up plenty of bright light. This flowering cactus really comes into its own when it gets all the sunshine it craves.

What temperature do apple cactus like?

The Peruvian apple cactus is happiest in temperatures between 60°F and 85°F (16°C to 29°C). While it can handle brief cold spells down to about 25°F, try to keep its environment warm and consistent. Your plant will reward you with healthy growth and maybe even those spectacular night blooms that make it so special!

How often do you water a Peruvian cactus?

Only water your Peruvian cactus when the top 2-3 inches of soil feel completely dry if you poke your finger in a few different spots. This is much more reliable than sticking to a calendar schedule. 

During spring and summer (its growing season), your plant will be thirstier and need deeper drinks, while in winter, it'll need much less water as it takes a little rest. Like all desert plants, it's adapted to go periods without water, so it's better to underwater than overwater.

Do you need to fertilize a Peruvian apple cactus?

Yes, but just a little! Feed it during spring and summer with a balanced fertilizer (10-10-10 or 20-20-20) diluted to half-strength. In winter, let it rest completely without any fertilizer as your Peruvian apple cactus takes its natural break. Working with its natural rhythm helps keep your plant happy and healthy.

How big do Peruvian Apple Cactus get?

Outdoors, these impressive plants can grow to an amazing 20-30 feet tall! Indoors, they're a bit more modest, typically reaching up to 8 feet. Either way, your Peruvian cactus makes a wonderful statement piece that adds height and character to any space. If you're looking for a plant with presence, you've found it!

How long do Peruvian Apple Cactus live?

With good care, your Peruvian apple cactus can be your plant companion for 20-30 years on average. Some special ones have even reached 50-80 years! This makes them a wonderful long-term addition to your home, growing alongside you through the years with relatively little fuss.

How do I get my Peruvian Apple Cactus to bloom?

To coax those magical night-blooming flowers, give your plant plenty of direct sunlight, keep temperatures warm, and fertilize gently during growing season. Be patient though—your cactus needs time to mature (often several years) and needs to experience a cool, dry winter period to trigger flowering. Trust us, the wait is so worth it! The fragrant white flowers open at night and usually last just until morning—it's a rare and truly special experience.

Does Peruvian Apple Cactus have thorns?

Yes, it does have spines along its ribbed stems. These natural defenses protect the plant in the wild (and remind us to be careful when handling at home). It's best to place your Peruvian cactus where you won't accidentally bump into it, especially in homes with little ones running around.

Pet friendly?

The Peruvian Cactus isn’t toxic to your pets, but the spines can be a serious hazard if your furry friends get too close. Best to place it somewhere they can’t reach. 

Is the Peruvian cactus safe for dogs?

The Peruvian apple cactus isn't toxic to dogs, but those spines can be an issue. It's best to keep curious pups at a safe distance to avoid any ouchy encounters. Think about placing your plant on a higher shelf or in a room where your four-legged friend doesn't usually roam.

Is the Peruvian cactus poisonous to cats?

Good news for cat lovers! The Peruvian apple cactus isn't poisonous to your feline friends. But just like with dogs, those spines can hurt curious cats who might paw or nibble at them. Try to place your plant somewhere your kitty can't reach to keep both your plant and pet happy and safe.

Factoids

What makes the night-blooming cactus special?

The night-blooming Peruvian cactus puts on one of nature's most magical shows. Its large, sweet-smelling white flowers open after sunset, attracting moths and bats as pollinators in the wild. Each bloom typically lasts just one night, making each flowering a rare treat worth staying up for. It's like nature's way of rewarding night owls!

How can you encourage the Peruvian cactus to bloom?

To help your Peruvian cactus bloom, give it consistent care with plenty of sunlight and proper watering. The most important thing is to let it have a cool, dry rest period during winter. Mature plants (usually several years old) are more likely to flower, so patience really pays off with this flowering cactus. Creating the right conditions helps your plant feel safe enough to share its gorgeous blooms with you.

How long does the night-blooming cactus flower last?

These spectacular flowers are nature's shooting stars—typically blooming for just one night! They open after sunset and close by the next morning, giving us just a brief window to enjoy their beauty. If you miss seeing one bloom, don't worry—there will be more chances as your plant matures. You might want to set a phone reminder when you notice a bud forming so you don't miss the show!

What's the difference between a Peruvian cactus and a night-blooming cereus?

While both create gorgeous night-blooming flowers, the Peruvian apple cactus (Cereus repandus) grows tall and column-like, thriving in desert conditions. The night-blooming cereus (Epiphyllum oxypetalum) has flat, leaf-like stems that can trail or climb, and prefers more tropical environments. Think of them as cousins who both love the nightlife but have adapted to very different homes!

Can you eat the Peruvian apple cactus fruit or is it poisonous?

The fruit is completely safe and actually delicious! These colorful "apples" are not only edible but packed with antioxidants, vitamins, and fiber. It's a sweet, unexpected bonus from your beautiful houseplant that you can enjoy with complete peace of mind.

Can you eat cactus fruit raw?

Absolutely! The fruit is best enjoyed raw, much like you'd eat kiwi or dragon fruit. Just slice it open and scoop out the refreshing flesh—no cooking needed for this natural treat. It's like getting a little thank-you gift from your plant!

Does Peruvian Apple Cactus taste good?

The Peruvian apple cactus has a lovely mild sweetness and refreshing flavor that most people really enjoy. If you like dragon fruit or kiwi, you'll probably love this desert treat too. It's nature's way of giving us a taste of its native habitat!

What flavor is Peruvian Apple Cactus?

People often describe the flavor as a wonderful mix of kiwi and dragon fruit—mildly sweet with refreshing, subtle notes. The Peruvian apple cactus fruit offers a unique taste that connects you directly to the plant's South American heritage.

What are the benefits of Peruvian Apple Cactus fruit?

Beyond tasting great, the fruit is full of antioxidants, vitamins, and dietary fiber. It's a nutritious snack that satisfies your sweet tooth while actually being good for you! We love plants that multitask by being both beautiful and nourishing.

Is Peruvian Apple Cactus hallucinogenic?

No, the Peruvian apple cactus is definitely NOT hallucinogenic. People sometimes mix it up with the San Pedro cactus (Echinopsis pachanoi), which does contain psychoactive compounds. Your Peruvian apple cactus is prized for its beauty and fruit, not for any mind-altering effects!

What is the Peruvian apple cactus growth rate?

Your Peruvian apple cactus grows at a steady pace, typically adding 1-2 feet each year when conditions are right. This gradual growth means you can enjoy watching it develop over time, becoming more impressive with each passing season. There's something really special about nurturing a plant and seeing it mature year after year.

Where does the Peruvian apple cactus come from?

Just as its name suggests, the Peruvian apple cactus is native to the dry regions of South America, particularly Peru, Brazil, and Argentina. These plants evolved in challenging desert conditions, which explains why they're so resilient and drought-tolerant in our homes. Their ability to thrive in tough environments makes them wonderfully adaptable houseplants for us!

Buy a Peruvian cactus

Ready to welcome this towering beauty into your home? Our Peruvian apple cactus makes a stunning statement piece that will transform your space with desert elegance, potentially reward you with spectacular night blooms, and even provide delicious fruits. It's perfect for plant lovers looking for a flowering cactus with character and presence. Add this night-blooming treasure to your collection today, and we'll be here to help you care for it every step of the way!

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 93808169714

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell indoor tall cactus plants

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.1 ★★★★★
Based on 82 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
G
Verified Purchase
garynini
Lexington, US
★★★★★ 5
Clear, cogent, and illuminating
Format: Kindle
Clear, cogent, and illuminating explanation of the difference between two approaches to interpreting the Constitution: originalism and the Living Constitution
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 18, 2015
C
Verified Purchase
Chris Morton
Carnegie, US
★★★★★ 5
Excellent!!!
Format: Kindle
A wonderfully refreshing argument for "the living constitution". Most surprisingly is that much of the argument is based in the philosophy of Edmund Burke, father of modern conservatism.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on February 22, 2017
M
Verified Purchase
Matt Cockerill
Lowell, US
★★★★★ 5
Five Stars
Format: Hardcover
Strauss demolishes originalism in a concise and accessible volume.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 11, 2014
S
Verified Purchase
Stephen J. Jaros
Carnegie, US
★★★★★ 3
Ultimately disappointing .. but still a good read
Format: Hardcover
This book does have a few commendable features. It is written in laymen's language, you don't have to be a constitutional law scholar like David A. Strauss to comprehend the arguments. And it's short. Won't take more than a couple of hours to read. But as a critique of the "originalist" constitutional doctrine, it is hit and miss. For example, Strauss argues that originalism has three major flaws (p.18): 1) the impossibility of determining what the understanding of the founding fathers was on a particular issue. 2) the impossibility of translating an original understanding so that it addresses today's problems. 3) no answer for Thomas Jefferson's question about why we, the living, should be governed by the "dead hand" of past generations, including the founders. Of these three, the first is the most telling, because it is indeed sometimes the case that we do not know what the founders would have thought about a particular issue, because that issue simply did not exist at the time of the enactment of the constitution or a particular amendment, or because that original meaning could be lost to history. The patent-ability of new life forms as a result of genetic engineering being a good example (but, other technological examples, like cases related to airplanes and cars, are NOT good examples, since while the founders were unaware of these technological advances, it's safe to assume they would recognize them as transportation vehicles, so their understanding of ships and horse carriages would apply to them). That's why i am what Strauss might call a "sometimes originalist" - my view is that IF there is no reasonable doubt about what the enactors of a constitutional provision would have thought about a case, then that should control the decision a court arrives at. But obviously, if the issue was unknown to the enactors, or if their views are forever lost to us due to the passage of time, then there is no "original understanding" of that particular issue, and some other method of constitutional interpretation must be relied on. The second and third objections are far less compelling to me. The second objection is IMO a non-issue. To ask "well, we know that in 1880 the enactors of the 14th amendment did not believe its equal protection clause outlawed employment discrimination against women, but would they believe that if they were living in the year 2000, with all the economic/cultural/technological changes that have developed over those 120 years?" is an irrelevant question. It's like asking if the 1969 Congress that enacted the Clean Air Act would still enact it if that Congress were to debate the issue in 2010: it's purely speculative and ungermane, since neither statutes nor constitutional provisions have expiration dates on them. Likewise, the 3rd objection is both shallow and disingenuous. Shallow because Jefferson clearly understood that the constitution, like laws enacted by the legislature, are subject to change by later generations, who can amend the constitution or pass new legislation to supersede what previous generations have accomplished. Disingenuous, because the invocation of Jefferson seems to be a tactical decision by Strauss, a way to tweak originalists by citing one of the very greatest of our founding fathers. Yet Jefferson can also be quoted to support an originalist view. For example, in 1801 he said: "The Constitution on which our union rests, shall be administered by me according to the safe and honest meaning contemplated by the plain understanding of the people of the United States, at the time of its adoption....These explanations are preserved in the publications of the time, and are too recent in the memories of most men to admit of question." (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, quoted from a letter dated 3/27/1801). The first part of this quote clearly indicates that Jefferson believed that constitutional provisions should be interpreted according to original understanding, not "modern, evolved" standards of meaning as David Strauss would contend. The second part speaks to the need i identified before, that of knowing within the bounds of reasonable doubt what the enactors understood a provision to mean. Beyond all this, though, is David Strauss's contention that a "living constitution", as defined by a common-law like accretion of judicial precedent in constitutional matters that leave the original meaning of the text behind, is necessary because otherwise our constitution would become an archaic relic unable to meet the demands of a changing society, and that the formal amendment process is too slow and cumbersome. Professor Strauss correctly notes that Jefferson believed that our institutions must evolve with the development of society; however, he crucially fails to note that to Jefferson, the primary mechanism of such innovation was to be the actions of the legislature. Constitutional provisions are expounded in broad, general language not to enable future judges to interpret them in light of changing societal conditions, but to permit elected bodies, like legislatures and congress, wide latitude to address the problems of today. Legislative bodies, which directly reflect the ebbs and flows of societal change and are accountable to the people, were Jefferson's preferred vehicle of constitutional innovation, not the decisions of insulated, life-tenured court judges. On this point, unlike on many others, Jefferson was in agreement with John Marshall. As Jean Edward Smith (1996) writes "When (in McCulloch v. Maryland) Marshall spoke of the Constitution as "intended for ages to come" and of the need to adapt it "to the various crises of human affairs", he was alluding to the responsibility of Congress, not the Court. And the limits on Congress were defined by the political process, not the judiciary" (p. 445). Thus, for example, while the enactors of the 14th amendment did not intend for it to ban employment discrimination against women, it also was not intended to prevent Congress or the state legislatures, at the time of the enactment or in the future, from enacting legislation that does protect women from employment discrimination should that type of legislation be deemed necessary or advisable. Jefferson was far more wary of "innovative" actions by judges, exemplified by his belief that "if federal judges have the final word over its meaning, the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please". Yet it is exactly this type of judicial activism that Strauss means when advocates a "living constitution". Strauss's fundamental error is revealed on page 103 when he says that "We cannot say that the text of the constitution does not matter ... no (textual) provision of the constitution can be overruled in the way a precedent can, or disregarded the way original understandings often are". What Strauss is saying here (well, he wouldn't put it this way, but this is my view of the matter) is that when a judge wants to be activist, to impose his/her personal policy preferences on a case, it's very important that the judge somehow, through clever verbal gymnastics, no matter how convoluted, "ground" that ruling in some actual constitutional-textual language. This is very important for achieving the political purpose of maintaining respect for the court in the eyes of the public. But to me, Strauss creates a false dichotomy: The text of the constitution is ONE AND THE SAME with its "original understanding". The 'text', the actual words of the constitution, does not exist independent of the original understanding of those words, the text is merely the communicative vessel used to convey that original understanding. That's the way language works. It's a method to convey meaning. Thus, to invoke the Due Process Clause of the 5th amendment to outlaw Federal segregation laws (as the Court did in 1955) when the enactors of the 5th amendment clearly (as Strauss admits) did not intend for it to mean that, is the SAME THING as ignoring the "text" of the constitution, since the text and original understanding are one and the same. Overall, i recommend this book. One will learn alot about constitutional history, and Professor Strauss is surely correct in that the "living constitution" view is in fact the dominant way in which the Court has gone about its business in practice, regardless of what legal theoreticians have thought. But, don't expect to be convinced by much Professor Strauss has to say about why this is a good thing.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2010
R
Ross L. Meyer
Bozeman, US
★★★★★ 5
Originalist v Living Document , 5 - 4
Format: Hardcover
I found the author's arguments to be logical and compelling. Those who embrace the so-called originalist view of the Constitution, for example Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, claim that they know - with great certainty - the absolute intent of the Constitution's authors. Further they claim that the Constitution provides specifics and principles which of course it does. It is simple to understand the specifics, but what about the principles? Principles, it seems to me, can and do have differing interpretations. One of the definitions of the word principle found in Merriam-Webster states, "a moral rule or belief that helps you know what is right and wrong and that influences your actions." As we all know, rules and beliefs frequently mean different things to different people. If it were not so, Supreme Court decisions would inevitably be decided 9 - 0. Many are familiar with the Supreme Court's case District of Columbia v. Heller in which Justice Scalia opined that the Second Amendment shouldn't stop the U.S. from barring certain weapons. While his opinion certainly seems reasonable to me, I cannot find that principle in the Constitution. Rather it seems to be a logical conclusion based on modern society, mores, and laws - perhaps, as Professor Strauss argues, Common Law. Whether one accepts the originalist view of the Constitution or, as I, believes a living interpretation of the great document is preferable, the one thing we can all agree on is that our nation is one of laws. To that end, it is incumbent on all citizens to accept and abide by the pronouncements of our judges, agree with them or not.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 18, 2014

recommand products

Britax 2017 B-Ready Stroller
21.07
Bugaboo Donkey 5 Twin carrycot and seat pushchair
26.12
B-Free Sport & B-Safe Gen2 FlexFit+ Travel System
29.85
Bugaboo Donkey 5 Mono 2-in-1 Stroller
24.65
Britax B-Free Premium & B-Safe Gen2 FlexFit+ Travel System
27.41