Didymoplexis

Accepted species 21 Documented here 1 Family Orchidaceae

Accepted species 21 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
Didymoplexis pallens Griff. 11 documented
Didymoplexis verrucosa J.Stewart & Hennessy 1 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis africana Summerh. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis avaratraensis P.J.Cribb, Nusb. & L.Gaut. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis cornuta J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis flexipes J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis gibbosa Aver. & Nuraliev 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis himalaica Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis holochelia Aver. & Nuraliev 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis latilabris Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis micradenia (Rchb.f.) Hemsl. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis obreniformis J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis pachystomoides (F.Muell.) Garay & W.Kittr. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis recurvata P.J.Cribb, Nusb. & L.Gaut. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis seidenfadenii C.S.Kumar & Ormerod 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis sirichaii Suddee 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis stellasilvae Hermans 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis striata J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis torricellensis Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis trukensis Tuyama 0 below the evidence gate
Didymoplexis vietnamica Ormerod 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.