Epiblastus

Accepted species 23 Documented here 0 Family Orchidaceae

Accepted species 23 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
Epiblastus accretus J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus acuminatus Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus auriculatus Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus basalis Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus buruensis J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus chimbuensis P.Royen 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus cuneatus J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus kerigomnensis P.Royen 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus lancipetalus Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus masarangicus (Kraenzl.) Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus merrillii L.O.Williams 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus montihageni P.Royen 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus mutabilis Ormerod 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus neohibernicus Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus ornithidioides Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus pteroglotta Gilli 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus pulchellus Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus pullei J.J.Sm. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus schultzei Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus sciadanthus (F.Muell.) Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus torricellensis Schltr. 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus tuberculatus R.S.Rogers 0 below the evidence gate
Epiblastus unguiculatus (J.J.Sm.) 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.