The study journey 2015-2016 (16 Nov. 2015 - 2 Aug. 2016), ended with a series of surveys conducted in the area of Imbassaí, Bahia, Brazil, on the northeast coast near the capital Salvador. Among these, A&M 1462 (photos 01-17) is related to Melocactus violaceus ssp. margaritaceus N. P. Taylor, one of the three ssp. in which Hunt et al. (2006, text: 190), divides the dominant Melocactus violaceus Pfeiffer; compare the population we detected with the photo representing the taxon in Hunt et al. (ibidem, atlas: 176, 176.3). In fact, the population encountered shows intermediate characters with  ssp. violaceus, a closeness also evident in the photo with which the authors identify the type species (ibidem, atlas: 177, 177.2). The small distinctions related to the floral character, of which we already know about the fallability in distinguishing taxa (Ritz et al. 2007; Lendel et al. umpubl. data & Nyffeler et al. umpubl. data in Nyffeler & Eggli 2010; Schlumpberger & Renner 2012; Anceschi & Magli 2013a; 2013b), and the color of the fruit, i.e. white for ssp. margaritaceus vs. lilac to pale pink for ssp. violaceus, they seem really laughable elements to try to somehow identify additional taxa within dominant and variable species such as M. violaceus, a taxon spread over an area involving as many as 9 states of Brazil (i.e. Alagoas, Bahia, Espírito Santo, Minas Gerais, Paraíba, Pernambuco, Rio de Janeiro, Rio Grande do Norte, Sergipe). Despite that the third ssp. (ssp. ritteri), does not highlight particular distinctive features (Hunt et al. 2006, atlas: 177, 177.1), since we have not visited the places where the taxon is said to be endemic (ibidem, text: 190), we prefer to postpone opinion on its taxonomic position. For the reasons explained, we include M. violaceus ssp. margaritaceus in the synonymy of M. violaceus. (Quoted from Anceschi & Magli 2021, 74-75)