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.
| Species | Authority | Usable photographs | Page |
|---|---|---|---|
| Argyrochosma microphylla | (Kuhn) Windham | 64 | documented |
| Argyrochosma dealbata | (Pursh) Windham | 49 | documented |
| Argyrochosma jonesii | (Maxon) Windham | 31 | documented |
| Argyrochosma limitanea | (Maxon) Windham | 25 | documented |
| Argyrochosma fendleri | (Kunze) Windham | 24 | documented |
| Argyrochosma nivea | (Poir.) Windham | 20 | documented |
| Argyrochosma formosa | (Liebm.) Windham | 6 | documented |
| Argyrochosma pallens | (Weath.) Windham | 2 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma peninsularis | (Maxon & Weath.) Windham | 2 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma chilensis | (Fée & J.Rémy) Windham | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma connectens | (C.Chr.) G.M.Zhang | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma delicatula | (Maxon & Weath.) Windham | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma flavens | (Sw.) A.R.Sm. & M.Kessler | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma incana | (C.Presl) Windham | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma lumholtzii | (Maxon & Weath.) Windham | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma palmeri | (Baker) Windham | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma pilifera | (R.M.Tryon) Windham | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma stuebeliana | (Hieron.) Windham | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Argyrochosma tenera | (Gillies ex Hook.) M.Kessler & A.R.Sm. | 0 | below the evidence 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.