Rohdea

Accepted species 19 Documented here 1 Family Asparagaceae

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
Rohdea fargesii (Baill.) Y.F.Deng 30 documented
Rohdea annulata (H.Li & J.L.Huang) Yamashita & M.N.Tamura 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea chlorantha (Baill.) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea delavayi (Franch.) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea dracaenoides Aver. & N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea emeiensis (Z.Y.Zhu) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea ensifolia (F.T.Wang & Tang) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea eucomoides (Baker) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea japonica (Thunb.) Roth 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea jinshanensis (Z.L.Yang & X.G.Luo) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea lichuanensis (Y.K.Yang, J.K.Wu & D.T.Peng) Yamashita & M.N.Tamura 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea longipedunculata (F.T.Wang & S.Yun Liang) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea nepalensis (Raf.) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea pachynema (F.T.Wang & Tang) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea siamensis (Yamashita & M.N.Tamura) Yamashita & M.N.Tamura 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea tonkinensis (Baill.) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea urotepala Hand.-Mazz. 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea verruculosa (Q.H.Chen) N.Tanaka 0 below the evidence gate
Rohdea wattii (C.B.Clarke) Yamashita & M.N.Tamura 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.