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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Salacca zalacca | (Gaertn.) Voss | 1 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca acehensis | Mogea & Zumaidar | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca affinis | Griff. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca bakeriana | J.Dransf. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca clemensiana | Becc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca dolicholepis | Burret | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca dransfieldiana | Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca flabellata | Furtado | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca glabrescens | Griff. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca graciliflora | Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca griffithii | A.J.Hend. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca lophospatha | J.Dransf. & Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca magnifica | Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca minuta | Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca multiflora | Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca ramosiana | Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca rupicola | J.Dransf. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca sarawakensis | Mogea | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca secunda | Griff. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca stolonifera | Hodel | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca sumatrana | Becc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca vermicularis | Becc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Salacca wallichiana | Mart. | 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.