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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Roemeria sicula | (Guss.) Galasso, Banfi, L.Sáez & Bartolucci | 98 | documented |
| Roemeria argemone | (L.) C.Morales, R.Mend. & Romero García | 91 | documented |
| Roemeria refracta | (Steven) DC. | 28 | documented |
| Roemeria hybrida | (L.) DC. | 26 | documented |
| Roemeria apula | (Ten.) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 17 | documented |
| Roemeria pavonina | (Schrenk ex Fisch. & C.A.Mey.) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 13 | documented |
| Roemeria armenii | (M.V.Agab.) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria carica | A.Baytop | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria davisii | (Kadereit) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria hispida | (Lam.) Stace | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria meiklei | (Kadereit) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria minor | (Boiv.) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria nigrotincta | (Fedde) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria ocellata | (Woronow) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Roemeria virchowii | (Asch. & Sint. ex Boiss.) Banfi, Bartolucci, J.-M.Tison & Galasso | 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.