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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uvariopsis bakeriana | (Hutch. & Dalziel) Robyns & Ghesq. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis bisexualis | Verdc. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis citrata | Couvreur & Niang. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis congensis | Robyns & Ghesq. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis congolana | (De Wild.) R.E.Fr. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis dicaprio | Cheek & Gosline | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis dioica | (Diels) Robyns & Ghesq. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis etugeana | Dagallier & Couvreur | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis guineensis | Keay | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis korupensis | Gereau & Kenfack | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis lovettiana | Couvreur & Q.Luke | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis niangadoumae | Couvreur & Dagallier | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis noldeae | Exell & Mendonça | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis oligocarpa | Dagallier & Couvreur | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis pedunculosa | (Diels) Robyns & Ghesq. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis sessiliflora | (Mildbr. & Diels) Robyns & Ghesq. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis solheidii | (De Wild.) Robyns & Ghesq. | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis submontana | Kenfack, Gosline & Gereau | 0 | below the evidence gate |
| Uvariopsis zenkeri | Engl. | 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.