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.
| Species | Authority | Usable photographs | Page |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kennedia rubicunda | (Schneev.) Vent. | 318 | documented |
| Kennedia prostrata | R.Br. | 279 | documented |
| Kennedia coccinea | (Curtis) Vent. | 48 | documented |
| Kennedia carinata | (Benth.) Van Houtte | 10 | documented |
| Kennedia nigricans | Lindl. | 6 | documented |
| Kennedia prorepens | (F.Muell.) F.Muell. | 1 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia audomariensis | Lesc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia baumanniana | Meisn. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia beckxiana | F.Muell. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia digitata | Lesc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia exaltata | F.M.Bailey | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia glabrata | Lindl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia laevipes | Gand. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia lateritia | F.Muell. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia longifolia | Lesc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia microphylla | Meisn. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia parviflora | Meisn. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia procurrens | Benth. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia retrorsa | Hemsl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia stirlingii | Lindl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia tomentosa | Van Houtte ex Bosse | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Kennedia volubilis | Lally | 0 | below the evidence 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.