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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rhamphidium borinquense | H.A.Crum & Steere | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium brasiliense | Broth. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium brevifolium | (Hampe & Lorentz) Broth. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium clathratum | (Hook.f. & Wilson) Fedosov, Brinda & Jan Kučera | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium dicranoides | (Müll.Hal.) Paris | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium dixonii | E.B.Bartram | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium fendleri | (Müll.Hal.) Broth. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium gayanum | (Mont.) Fedosov, Brinda & Jan Kučera | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium krausei | (Lorentz) Fedosov, Brinda & Jan Kučera | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium laetum | (Kunze ex Müll.Hal.) Broth. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium montanum | (Mitt.) R.H.Zander | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium novoguineense | D.H.Norris & T.J.Kop. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium ovale | E.B.Bartram | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium purpuratum | Mitt. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium pygmaeolum | (Müll.Hal.) Broth. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium vaginatum | Mitt. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Rhamphidium veitchii | Dixon | 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.