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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lacistema aggregatum | (P.J.Bergius) Rusby | 18 | documented |
| Lacistema grandifolium | Schnizl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema hasslerianum | Chodat | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema krukovii | Sleumer | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema ligiae | L.Marinho & K.M.Pimenta | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema lucidum | Schnizl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema macbridei | Baehni | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema nena | J.F.Macbr. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema polystachyum | Schnizl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema pubescens | Mart. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema robustum | Schnizl. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lacistema serrulatum | Mart. | 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.