Phaulopsis

Accepted species 23 Documented here 2 Family Acanthaceae

Accepted species 23 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
Phaulopsis imbricata (Forssk.) Sweet 52 documented
Phaulopsis dorsiflora (Retz.) Santapau 14 documented
Phaulopsis barteri T.Anderson 2 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis aequivoca Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis angolana S.Moore 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis ciliata (Willd.) Hepper 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis gediensis Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis grandiflora Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis johnstonii C.B.Clarke 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis lankesterioides (Lindau) Lindau 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis latiloba Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis lindaviana De Wild. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis marcelinoi Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis micrantha (Benth.) C.B.Clarke 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis pulchella Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis rupestris (Nees) Lindau 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis sangana S.Moore 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis savannicola Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis semiconica P.G.Mey. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis symmetrica Mankt. 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis talbotii S.Moore 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis tanzaniensis Vollesen 0 below the evidence gate
Phaulopsis verticillaris (Nees) Mankt. 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.