Rhytidocaulon

Accepted species 17 Documented here 0 Family Apocynaceae

Accepted species 17 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
Rhytidocaulon arachnoideum T.A.McCoy 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon baricum Thulin 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon ciliatum Hanácek & Ricánek 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon elegantissimum Hanácek & Ricánek 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon fulleri Lavranos & Mortimer 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon macrolobum Lavranos 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon mccoyi Lavranos & Mies 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon molamatarense T.A.McCoy & Plowes 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon paradoxum P.R.O.Bally 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon piliferum Lavranos 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon pseudosubscandens T.A.McCoy 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon richardianum Lavranos 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon sheilae D.V.Field 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon specksii T.A.McCoy 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon splendidum T.A.McCoy 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon subscandens P.R.O.Bally 0 below the evidence gate
Rhytidocaulon tortum (N.E.Br.) M.G.Gilbert 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.