Piptocoma

Accepted species 19 Documented here 0 Family Asteraceae

Accepted species 19 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
Piptocoma rufescens Cass. 1 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma acevedoi Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma acuminata (Kunth) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma antillana Urb. 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma antillana Urban 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma areolata (Wurdack) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma barinensis (Aristeg.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma discolor (Kunth) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma hypochlora (S.F.Blake) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma macrophylla (Sch.Bip.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma milleri (J.R.Johnst.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma neglecta (Stutts) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma niceforoi (Cuatrec.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma roraimensis (Steyerm.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma samanensis Alain 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma schomburgkii (Sch.Bip.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma spruceana (Benth.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma trujillensis (Aristeg.) Pruski 0 below the evidence gate
Piptocoma vernonioides (Kunth) Pruski 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.