Angraecopsis

Accepted species 20 Documented here 0 Family Orchidaceae

Accepted species 20 in this genus

Every accepted species in the genus is listed. A name links to its page when we hold at least three commercially licensed photographs of it. Where we do not, the row shows how many we actually found, which is usually none.

SpeciesAuthority Usable photographsPage
Angraecopsis cryptantha P.J.Cribb 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis dolabriformis (Rolfe) Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis elliptica Summerh. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis gassneri G.Will. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis gracillima (Rolfe) Summerh. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis hallei Szlach. & Olszewski 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis holochila Summerh. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis ischnopus (Schltr.) Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis lemurelloides P.J.Cribb & Hermans 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis lisowskii Szlach. & Olszewski 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis lovettii P.J.Cribb 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis macrophylla Summerh. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis malawiensis P.J.Cribb 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis parva (P.J.Cribb) P.J.Cribb 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis parviflora (Thouars) Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis pobeguinii (Finet) H.Perrier 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis tenerrima Kraenzl. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis thomensis Stévart & P.J.Cribb 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis tridens (Lindl.) Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Angraecopsis trifurca (Rchb.f.) Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate

Why some species have no pagethe gate

This site is commercial, so it can only publish photographs licensed for commercial use. Roughly three quarters of the photographs on iNaturalist are CC BY-NC, which excludes them. A species needs at least three usable photographs before we will build it a page, because a page with one picture and no traits tells you nothing you could not get from a search result, and generating hundreds of thousands of those is precisely the practice that got the previous version of this site deleted.

So the species above without a link are not errors and they are not omissions. They are real, accepted plants that we cannot yet document to the standard we hold ourselves to, and the count in the photographs column is exactly how far short we fall.

Sourcesevery claim on this page

  1. World Flora Online Plant List. Accepted names, authorities, classification. CC0. Retrieved 2026-07-12.
  2. iNaturalist. Photograph counts, restricted to CC0 / CC BY / CC BY-SA. Retrieved 2026-06-27.