Diosma

Accepted species 30 Documented here 21 Family Rutaceae

Accepted species 30 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
Diosma hirsuta L. 387 documented
Diosma oppositifolia L. 369 documented
Diosma echinulata I.Williams 76 documented
Diosma apetala (Dümmer) I.Williams 68 documented
Diosma prama I.Williams 59 documented
Diosma passerinoides Steud. 38 documented
Diosma aristata I.Williams 36 documented
Diosma aspalathoides Lam. 36 documented
Diosma rourkei I.Williams 27 documented
Diosma recurva Cham 25 documented
Diosma tenella I.Williams 20 documented
Diosma guthriei R.Glover 19 documented
Diosma arenicola I.Williams 13 documented
Diosma demissa I.Williams 12 documented
Diosma fallax I.Williams 11 documented
Diosma subulata J.C.Wendl. 11 documented
Diosma subulata Wendl. 11 documented
Diosma awilana I.Williams 8 documented
Diosma sabulosa I.Williams 8 documented
Diosma haelkraalensis I.Williams 6 documented
Diosma ramosissima Bartl. & H.L.Wendl. 6 documented
Diosma pedicellata I.Williams 2 below the evidence gate
Diosma dichotoma P.J.Bergius 1 below the evidence gate
Diosma dichotoma Berg. 1 below the evidence gate
Diosma acmaephylla Eckl. & Zeyh. 0 below the evidence gate
Diosma meyeriana Spreng. 0 below the evidence gate
Diosma parvula I.Williams 0 below the evidence gate
Diosma pilosa I.Williams 0 below the evidence gate
Diosma strumosa I.Williams 0 below the evidence gate
Diosma thyrsophora Eckl. & Zeyh. 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.