Catasetum sanguineum (Linden) Lindl. & Paxton
Cited as Kew's World Checklist cites it, Catasetum sanguineum (Linden) Lindl. & Paxton: GBIF's backbone key for this page carries the name with another author, Lindl. & Paxton.
Photographs not checked
iNaturalist was skipped (not asked) when this page was built. Not asked, or not answered, is not "none": nothing here claims there is none. Why the site says it this way.Cultivation
Grouped as an orchid, listed under the genus Catasetum in the archetype table, and Kew describes it as “pseudobulbous geophyte or epiphyte”.
How this section is made
Each card states this species' habitat figures with their sources, and what two fixed rules read from them; nothing here says what the plant does, wants or tolerates. The rules · the terms.
Group. Listed under the genus Catasetum in the archetype table, and Kew describes it as “pseudobulbous geophyte or epiphyte”. A group is taken only where Kew's description of the species agrees with the table's listing. The table gives no figure and no prose; the cold floor is the habitat's alone.
Climate across the habitat
Natural habitat
Photographs
Related
Other Catasetum 29 in the reference
Catasetum cernuum Orchidaceae Photo: CC BY, Cajá-manga Catasetum denticulatum Orchidaceae
Catasetum discolor Orchidaceae Photo: CC BY, Nolan Exe
Catasetum fimbriatum Orchidaceae Photo: CC BY, Celso Henrique Varela Rios Catasetum fuchsii Orchidaceae Catasetum hookeri Orchidaceae
Catasetum integerrimum Spurred Catasetum Photo: CC0, author not stated Catasetum juruenense Orchidaceae all 30 ›Names & registers
Also known as Catasetum naso var. viride; Catasetum sanguineum var. integrale; Catasetum sanguineum var. sanguineum; Catasetum sanguineum var. viride; Myanthus sanguineus. (GBIF Backbone)
The record
Every figure here is derived from public data by a stated rule and names its source; nothing about this species is written for its page by a person or by AI, apart from the marked, credited quotations. How →
Where this page came from built 2026-10-21
gbif.species answeredasked 2026-10-21GBIF's key 2803779 is Catasetum sanguineum Lindl. & Paxton; the page links Kew's Catasetum sanguineum (Linden) Lindl. & Paxton, and the name is cited as Kew cites itgbif.synonyms answeredasked 2026-10-21gbif.vernacular answeredasked 2026-10-21names fetched 2026-10-21wcvp.distribution answeredas of 2026-06-04gbif.occurrences answeredas of 2026-10-21GBIF occurrence download https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.hbdw64, of 2026-10-21; 1 record within 1 km of a botanic garden, herbarium or zoo left out (1 at a botanic garden or arboretum; Wikidata's list)climate nothing to reportasked 2026-10-212 in-range records, none placed to within 10 kmwikidata answeredasked 2026-10-21IPNI and POWO linked by Kew's number for Catasetum sanguineum (Linden) Lindl. & Paxton (the item's: IPNI 621925-1, POWO 303266-2)wikipedia nothing to reportasked 2026-10-21inat.photos.wild nothing to reportasked 2026-10-22from iNaturalist's open data of 2026-09-27: research-grade observations with an open-licence photograph, the 24 whose photographs iNaturalist received last (the open data holds no votes); filled 2026-10-22inat.photos.cultivated not askedgbif.media nothing to reportasked 2026-10-21commons nothing to reportasked 2026-10-21openalex not askednot yet asked for this reference; a later fill takes the papers from OpenAlex's snapshotEvery source is recorded as having answered, reported nothing, refused, failed, not been asked, or answered twice where one answer is taken (“not taken: two items answered”), and, for a source asked when this page was built, when: the figures are as the source held them that day; a source read from a file (Kew's World Checklist, a GBIF download) says "as of" the file's day instead; a row carried from an earlier build of the page names that build instead. Only “nothing to report” is ever shown as an absence. Records came from 1 datasets via GBIF.org; each carries its own licence.