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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Theobroma cacao | L. | 213 | documented |
| Theobroma speciosum | Willd. ex Spreng. | 25 | documented |
| Theobroma bicolor | Bonpl. | 14 | documented |
| Theobroma simiarum | Donn.Sm. | 8 | documented |
| Theobroma grandiflorum | (Willd. ex Spreng.) K.Schum. | 5 | documented |
| Theobroma angustifolium | DC. | 4 | documented |
| Theobroma gileri | Cuatrec. | 4 | documented |
| Theobroma bernoullii | Pittier | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma canumanense | Pires & Fróes ex Cuatrec. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma cirmolinae | Cuatrec. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma duckei | Huber | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma glaucum | H.Karst. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma guianense | (Aubl.) J.F.Gmel. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma hylaeum | Cuatrec. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma mammosum | Cuatrec. & J.León | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma microcarpum | Mart. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma nemorale | Cuatrec. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma obovatum | Klotzsch ex Bernoulli | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma sinuosum | Pav. ex Huber | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma sylvestris | Aubl. ex Mart. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Theobroma velutinum | Benoist | 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.