Haplocladium

Accepted species 19 Documented here 1 Family Leskeaceae

Accepted species 19 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
Haplocladium microphyllum (Sw. ex Hedw.) Müll.Hal. 21 documented
Haplocladium angustifolium (Hampe & Müll.Hal.) Broth. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium discolor (Paris & Broth.) Broth. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium dispersum (Müll.Hal. ex Broth.) Reimers 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium filirameum (Broth. & Paris) M.Fleisch. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium gracilisetum Thér. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium jacquemontii (Bruch & Schimp. ex Müll.Hal.) Broth. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium kiusiuense Broth. ex Ihsiba 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium larminatii (Broth. & Paris) Broth. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium parvulum R.Watan. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium perparaphyllum R.Watan. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium persistens (Müll.Hal.) Broth. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium plumulosum Herzog 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium porphyreopelma Müll.Hal. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium schimperi Thér. 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium stratosum (Mitt.) Dixon 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium strictulum (Cardot) Reimers 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium vestitum Dixon & P.de la Varde 0 below the evidence gate
Haplocladium virginianum (Brid.) Broth. 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.