Endostemon

Accepted species 20 Documented here 4 Family Lamiaceae

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
Endostemon obtusifolius (E.Mey. ex Benth.) N.E.Br. 41 documented
Endostemon tereticaulis (Poir.) M.R.Ashby 16 documented
Endostemon viscosus (Roth) M.R.Ashby 9 documented
Endostemon tenuiflorus (Benth.) M.R.Ashby 3 documented
Endostemon albus A.J.Paton, Harley & M.M.Harley 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon camporus (Gürke) M.R.Ashby 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon ctenoneurus Harley 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon glandulosus Harley & Sebsebe 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon gracilis (Benth.) M.R.Ashby 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon kelleri (Briq.) Ryding ex A.J.Paton & Harley 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon leucosphaerus (Briq.) A.J.Paton, Harley & M.M.Harley 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon membranaceus (Benth.) Ayob. ex A.J.Paton & Harley 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon obbiadensis (Chiov.) M.R.Ashby 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon racemosus Ryding, A.J.Paton & Thulin 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon stenocaulis (Hedge) Ryding, A.J.Paton & Thulin 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon tomentosus Harley & Sebsebe 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon tubulascens (Briq.) M.R.Ashby 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon usambarensis M.R.Ashby 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon villosus (Briq.) M.R.Ashby 0 below the evidence gate
Endostemon wakefieldii (Baker) M.R.Ashby 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.