Identidad taxonómica

Scientific name
Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Canonical name: The scientific name without its authorship or date, for example Zea mays instead of Zea mays L.
Litchi chinensis
Authorship: The author or authors credited with publishing the scientific name. It is written after the name, sometimes with the year, for example L. (Linnaeus) in Zea mays L. An author in parentheses first published the name in another genus or rank.
Sonn.
Common names
Lichee, Lychee, leechee, litchi
Names in other languages (43)Chinesische Haselnuss, Leci, Letchi, Lichi, Liebesfrucht, Litchi de Chine, Cerisier de Chine, Litchi de Chine, Ponceau, Litchi de Chine, Letchi, Létchi, Litchi, Litchi ponceau, Cerisier de Chine, Ponceau, Litchibaum, Litchipflanze, Litsch, Litschi, Litschibaum, Litschipflaume, Lixia, alexia, cerisier de Chine, dvojslivka čínska, lechia, lichia, lici, liczi chińskie, litchi de Chine, litchia, litsi, liči, liči čínské, Личи китайская, Лічы, ליצ'י, ليتشي, লিচু, ลิ้นจี่, ក្ប ង, គូលែន, ライチ, レイシ, 荔枝, 荔枝叶, 荔枝壳, 荔枝核, 荔枝根, 리치, 여지
Kingdom: One of the broadest ranks of biological classification. It groups organisms that share very basic features, for example plants (Plantae), animals (Animalia) or fungi (Fungi).
Plantae
Phylum: Rank below kingdom that groups organisms with a shared general body plan, for example chordates (Chordata), arthropods (Arthropoda) or vascular plants (Tracheophyta). In botany the same rank is also called division.
Tracheophyta
Class: Rank below phylum, for example mammals (Mammalia), birds (Aves), insects (Insecta) or monocot plants such as grasses and orchids (Liliopsida).
Magnoliopsida
Order: Rank below class that groups related families, for example grasses and their relatives (Poales) or bats (Chiroptera).
Sapindales
Family: Rank below order that groups related genera. Family names usually end in -aceae in botany (for example Poaceae, the grass family) and in -idae in zoology (for example Felidae, the cat family).
Sapindaceae
Genus: Rank that groups closely related species. Its name is the first word of a species' scientific name and starts with a capital letter, for example Zea in Zea mays.
Litchi
Specific epithet: The second word of a species' scientific name. On its own it does not name the species: it always goes with the genus, for example mays in Zea mays.
chinensis
Taxonomic rank: The level a name occupies in the hierarchy of biological classification, such as kingdom, family, genus, species or subspecies.
species
Reference species
Litchi chinensis
Taxonomic status: Whether the taxonomic catalogue the record comes from currently accepts this name for the organism, or treats it as a synonym of another accepted name or as doubtful.
accepted name

Photos and conservation status

IUCN Red List category: The extinction-risk category that the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) assigns to a species on its Red List. EX Extinct: there is no reasonable doubt that the last individual has died. EW Extinct in the wild: it survives only in cultivation, in captivity or as a population far outside its past range. CR Critically endangered, EN Endangered and VU Vulnerable: the three threatened categories, from an extremely high to a high risk of extinction in the wild. NT Near threatened: close to qualifying as threatened. LC Least concern: evaluated and not threatened. DD Data deficient: there is not enough information to assess its risk. NE Not evaluated: not yet assessed against the criteria. It describes the risk of the species worldwide, not its situation in a project's area.
Not evaluated (NE)
Source: IUCN Red List via GBIF, queried on 2026-10-09 10:59.
Photo of Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Photo: amantedarmanin · CC BY 4.0 · View original image · Original observation
Photo of Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Photo: Dhiraj Kumar Sah · CC0 1.0 · View original image · Original observation
Photo of Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Photo: Sagnik Dutta Roy · CC BY 4.0 · View original image · Original observation
Photo of Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Photo: 葉子 · CC0 1.0 · View original image · Original observation
Photo of Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Photo: CYL · CC BY 4.0 · View original image · Original observation
Photo of Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Photo: amantedarmanin · CC BY 4.0 · View original image · Original observation

Research-grade iNaturalist observations via GBIF, CC0 or CC BY licences only, queried on 2026-10-09 10:59.

Interacciones documentadas

GloBI says it is documented somewhere in the world. Biolitica answers whether it could happen here.

A documented interaction means it was recorded somewhere in the world. It does not mean it occurs here.

Types shown: 12 of 12 is a host of × is eaten by × interacts with × has as a parasite × is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of × has its flowers visited by × co-occurs ecologically with × is pollinated by × has as a pathogen × is adjacent to × is a symbiont of × is visited by ×

Blocks that do not sit under a navigation concept heading keep the source's own term: no navigation concept has been assigned to them yet.

is a host of 216 organisms

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it. In the source ontology symbiosis covers mutualism, commensalism and parasitism alike, so this block holds attackers and allies side by side.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Anthracnose Colletotrichum gloeosporioides Glomerellaceae is a host of 36 not compared
Diaporthe litchiicola Diaporthaceae is a host of 8 no location
Phytophthora litchii Peronosporaceae is a host of 7 no location
Lasiodiplodia theobromae Botryosphaeriaceae is a host of 6 no location
Showing 4 of 216, by number of studies See more of this type

is eaten by 78 organisms

This term does declare that the organism harms this species.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Litchi Lantern Bug Pyrops candelarius Fulgoridae is eaten by 4 no location
Wahlberg's Epauletted Fruit Bat Epomophorus wahlbergi Pteropodidae is eaten by 3 not compared
Green Snout Lanternfly Pyrops viridirostris Fulgoridae is eaten by 2 no location
Rothney's Paper Wasp Polistes rothneyi Vespidae is eaten by 2 not compared
Showing 4 of 78, by number of studies See more of this type

interacts with 57 organisms

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Litchi Mite Aceria litchii Eriophyidae interacts with 12 not compared
Anastatus Eupelmidae interacts with 8 no location Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
Pteropus rufus Pteropodidae interacts with 5 no location
Greater Mascarene Flying Fox Pteropus niger Pteropodidae interacts with 5 no location
Showing 4 of 57, by number of studies See more of this type

has as a parasite 17 organisms

This term does declare that the organism harms this species.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Anastatus Eupelmidae has as a parasite 5 no location Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
Anastatus japonicus Eupelmidae has as a parasite 2 no location
Litchi Mite Aceria litchii Eriophyidae has as a parasite 2 not compared
Ooencyrtus Encyrtidae has as a parasite 2 no location Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
Showing 4 of 17, by number of studies See more of this type

is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of 16 organisms

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Racocetra castanea is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of 1 not compared
Ambispora leptoticha Ambisporaceae is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of 1 not compared
Funneliformis caledonius Glomeraceae is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of 1 not compared
Rhizophagus intraradices Glomeraceae is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of 1 not compared
Showing 4 of 16, by number of studies See more of this type

Flower visit

has its flowers visited by 16 organisms

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it. Visiting a flower is not pollinating it. «Pollinates» is a different term and a different block, and merging the two is the measured defect that turned ~88 shared «pollinators» into birds and primates.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Marmalade Hoverfly Episyrphus balteatus Syrphidae has its flowers visited by 1 no location
Allodape mirabilis Apidae has its flowers visited by 1 no location
Oxytrigona cagafogo Apidae has its flowers visited by 1 not compared
Animal Melanostoma Syrphidae has its flowers visited by 1 no location Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
Showing 4 of 16, by number of studies See more of this type

co-occurs ecologically with 13 organisms

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Dentiscutata heterogama Gigasporaceae co-occurs ecologically with 1 not compared
Rhizophagus clarus Glomeraceae co-occurs ecologically with 1 not compared
Rhizophagus manihotis Glomeraceae co-occurs ecologically with 1 not compared
Funneliformis caledonium Glomeraceae co-occurs ecologically with 1 not compared
Showing 4 of 13, by number of studies See more of this type

Pollination

is pollinated by 8 organisms

This term declares that the organism benefits this species. «Visits the flowers of» is a different term and a different block: a visitor is not a pollinator, and merging the two is the measured defect that turned ~88 shared «pollinators» into birds and primates.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
European Honey Bee Apis mellifera Apidae is pollinated by 1 no location
Hornets, Paper Wasps, Potter Wasps, And Allies Vespidae Vespidae is pollinated by 1 no location Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at family level.
European Honey Bee Apis mellifera Apidae is pollinated by 1 no location
Mopane Stingless Bee Plebeina armata Apidae is pollinated by 1 no location
Showing 4 of 8, by number of studies See more of this type

has as a pathogen 2 organisms

This term does declare that the organism harms this species. It is a narrow block, and it cannot be the only one that is read: the most frequent term in the catalogue is the one above, which declares no harm, so much of what a reader would call a pest arrives there instead.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Algal Leaf Spot Cephaleuros virescens Trentepohliaceae has as a pathogen 1 not compared
Eriophyes has as a pathogen 1 not compared Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
Showing 2 of 2, by number of studies

is adjacent to 1 organism

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Ceratotarsonemus scitus Tarsonemidae is adjacent to 1 not compared
Showing 1 of 1, by number of studies

is a symbiont of 1 organism

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it. In the source ontology symbiosis covers mutualism, commensalism and parasitism alike, so this block holds attackers and allies side by side.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Fungi Including Lichens Fungi is a symbiont of 1 not compared Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at kingdom level.
Showing 1 of 1, by number of studies

is visited by 1 organism

The authority declares no effect on this species for this term: neither that it harms it nor that it benefits it.

Organism Reads as Studies Where it was documented Actions
Knight Anole Anolis equestris Anolidae is visited by 1 not compared
Showing 1 of 1, by number of studies

Acompañantes documentados

This agronomic reading comes from a source reserved for internal use, so it is not shown here.

Documented uses and recommendations

Uses and recommendations that a source documents for this species beside a crop, each in its own context. They are the source's statements, not traits of the species and not Biolítica's recommendations, and none of them is a relation between two species.

Among the sources you can read, none documents a use or recommendation of this species beside a crop.