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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cissampelos capensis | L.f. | 271 | documented |
| Cissampelos pareira | L. | 97 | documented |
| Cissampelos torulosa | E.Mey. ex Harv. & Sond. | 32 | documented |
| Cissampelos tropaeolifolia | DC. | 7 | documented |
| Cissampelos mucronata | A.Rich. | 5 | documented |
| Cissampelos ovalifolia | DC. | 5 | documented |
| Cissampelos andromorpha | DC. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos arenicola | M.Nee & R.Ortiz | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos fasciculata | Benth. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos friesiorum | Diels | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos glaberrima | A.St.-Hil. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos grandifolia | Triana & Planch. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos hirta | Klotzsch | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos hispida | Forman | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos keniensis | Y.D.Zhou & Q.F.Wang | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos laxiflora | Moldenke | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos nigrescens | Diels | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos owariensis | P.Beauv. ex DC. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos rigidifolia | (Engl.) Diels | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos sympodialis | Eichler | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos tenuipes | Engl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Cissampelos verticillata | Rhodes | 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.