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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lucuma grandiflora | A.DC. | 9 | documented |
| Lucuma bifera | Molina | 4 | documented |
| Lucuma campechiana | Kunth | 4 | documented |
| Lucuma arguacoensium | H.Karst. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma brachyandra | (Aubrév. & Pellegr.) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma capacifolia | (Pilz) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma dominigensis | C.F.Gaertn. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma grandis | (Eyma) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma kossmanniae | (C.C.Vasconc. & Terra-Araujo) C.C.Vasconc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma littoralis | Mart. ex Miq. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma manaosensis | (Aubrév. & Pellegr.) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma multiflora | A.DC. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma oxypetala | (T.D.Penn.) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma pachycalyx | (T.D.Penn.) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma rivicoa | C.F.Gaertn. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma rodriguesiana | (Pires & T.D.Penn.) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma stenophylla | (Baehni) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma trigonosperma | (Eyma) Swenson | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Lucuma venosa | (Mart.) Mart. & Miq. | 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.