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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lomaridium attenuatum | (Sw.) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 143 | documented |
| Lomaridium fragile | (Liebm.) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 5 | documented |
| Lomaridium schottii | (Colla) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 4 | documented |
| Lomaridium contiguum | (Mett.) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 2 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium acutum | (Desv.) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium angustifolium | (Kunth) Vicent & Gabriel y Galán | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium biforme | (Baker) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium binervatum | (Poir.) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium bonapartei | (Rakotondr.) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium dendrophilum | (Sodiro) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium ensiforme | (Liebm.) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium fuscosquamosum | (A.Rojas) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium nigrocostatum | (A.Rojas) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium plumieri | (Desv.) C.Presl | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium simillimum | (Baker) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lomaridium xiphophyllum | (Baker) Gasper & V.A.O.Dittrich | 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.