Zephyranthes pulchella (showy zephyrlily)

Plate 1 figs. a–h · 7 observations

This species has been photographed under an open licence only 7 times, so some figures below are different views of the same plant, taken on the same day, rather than different individuals. They are usually different parts of it: the leaf, the flower, the bark.

Zephyranthes pulchella, photographed by Eric Knight — fig. a Eric Knight, CC BY 4.0 / 2021-08-10 / obs. 149970106

Zephyranthes pulchella, photographed by Rich Sommer — fig. c Rich Sommer, CC BY 4.0 / obs. 97399216

Zephyranthes pulchella, photographed by Claudio Cantú Muñiz — fig. d Claudio Cantú Muñiz, CC BY 4.0 / obs. 91545280

Zephyranthes pulchella, photographed by johnyochum — fig. e johnyochum, CC BY 4.0 / obs. 5135698

Zephyranthes pulchella, photographed by Sam Kieschnick — fig. f Sam Kieschnick, CC BY 4.0 / obs. 11402652

Zephyranthes pulchella, photographed by Evelyn Lazzaretti 🏳️‍⚧️ — fig. h Evelyn Lazzaretti 🏳️‍⚧️, CC0 1.0 / obs. 162556281

Every figure is a research-grade observation under CC0, CC BY or CC BY-SA, rehosted with the photographer’s name, the licence and the observation it came from. Photographs under a NonCommercial licence are excluded from this site and are never stored, which costs us a great many pictures and is not negotiable.

Native range 2 botanical countries

Native distribution of Zephyranthes pulchella, after Kew’s World Checklist of Vascular Plants. Introduced, extinct and doubtful records are excluded, so this is where the plant is from, not everywhere it now grows.

Region	TDWG code	Continent
Mexico Northeast	MXE	NORTHERN AMERICA
Texas	TEX

Region boundaries approximated from Natural Earth (public domain) and mapped to TDWG World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions (WGSRPD) level-3 botanical countries (Brummitt 2001). Indicative, not the official WGSRPD geometry.

Flowering 96 in flower of 97 examined

100%

97%

100%

Proportion of examined Zephyranthes pulchella in flower, by month
Month	In flower	Examined	Share	95% interval
Jan	0	0	too few examined
Feb	0	0	too few examined
Mar	0	0	too few examined
Apr	0	0	too few examined
May	3	3	too few examined
Jun	11	11	100%	74% to 100%
Jul	9	9	100%	70% to 100%
Aug	15	15	100%	80% to 100%
Sep	36	37	97%	86% to 100%
Oct	16	16	100%	81% to 100%
Nov	3	3	too few examined
Dec	3	3	too few examined

Peak flowering in Jun. Each bar is the share of Zephyranthes pulchella observations in which someone actually recorded the reproductive state and found the plant in flower, not the raw number of flowering records. That distinction matters: people observe plants far more in spring than in winter, so a bare count of flowering records partly measures when people go outside. Dividing by the number examined removes that. 96 of 97 examined observations were in flower, every one of them research grade. The whisker on each bar is a 95% Wilson interval. 7 months have fewer than 5 examined observations, so no proportion is drawn for them. This is still a global aggregate and not a forecast for your garden: the same species flowers on different dates in different hemispheres. Where a species has fewer than 30 flowering records we do not draw this chart at all. Computed from 10.15468/dl.cgje2x.

Also published as 1 synonym

A synonym is not an error. It is a record of botanists disagreeing, in print, about where this plant belongs. Each of these was somebody’s considered answer.

Atamasco pulchella (J.G.Sm.) Greene

Sourcesevery claim on this page

World Flora Online Plant List. accepted name, authority, classification. CC0. Retrieved 2026-07-12.
iNaturalist. photographs and flowering annotations, CC0 / CC BY / CC BY-SA only. per photograph. Retrieved 2026-06-27.
Wikidata. common name (P1843), joined on the World Flora Online identifier (P7715). CC0. Retrieved 2026-07-13.
Kew, World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP v16). native distribution by TDWG level-3 botanical country, and life form. CC BY 3.0. Retrieved 2026-06-04.

We publish what we can source and we say so when we cannot. This page has no care advice and no toxicity claim, because we do not yet have those from a source we can cite.