Rhodomyrtus

Accepted species 22 Documented here 3 Family Myrtaceae

Accepted species 22 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
Rhodomyrtus tomentosa (Aiton) Hassk. 130 documented
Rhodomyrtus psidioides (G.Don) Benth. 65 documented
Rhodomyrtus macrocarpa Benth. 7 documented
Rhodomyrtus effusa Guymer 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus elegans (Blume) A.J.Scott 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus guymeriana N.Snow & J.P.Atwood 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus kaweaensis N.Snow 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus lanata Guymer 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus locellata (Guillaumin) Burret 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus longisepala N.Snow & J.McFadden 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus mengenensis N.Snow 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus misimana N.Snow 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus montana Guymer 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus obovata C.T.White 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus pervagata Guymer 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus pinnatinervis C.T.White 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus salomonensis (C.T.White) A.J.Scott 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus sericea Burret 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus surigaoensis Elmer 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus takeuchii N.Snow & J.Cantley 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus trineura (F.Muell.) Benth. 0 below the evidence gate
Rhodomyrtus verecunda A.J.Ford & Peter G.Wilson 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.