Canonical name: The scientific name without its authorship or date, for example Zea mays instead of Zea mays L. — The scientific name without its authorship or date, for example Zea mays instead of Zea mays L.
Acrocarpus fraxinifolius
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. — 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.
Wight & Arn.
Common names
Kenya coffeeshade, Pink Cedar, pink-cedar, red-cedar, shingletreeNames in other languages (10)Acrocarpo, Mundani, acrocarpus, cedro rosado, dakspaanboom, saarnitikaripalko, Árvore-de-ripa, Акрокарпус ясенелистный, 顶果木, 顶果树
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). — 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. — 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). — 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). — Rank below class that groups related families, for example grasses and their relatives (Poales) or bats (Chiroptera).
Fabales
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). — 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).
Fabaceae
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. — 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.
Acrocarpus
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. — 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.
fraxinifolius
Taxonomic rank: The level a name occupies in the hierarchy of biological classification, such as kingdom, family, genus, species or subspecies. — The level a name occupies in the hierarchy of biological classification, such as kingdom, family, genus, species or subspecies.
species
Reference species
Acrocarpus fraxinifolius
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. — 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. — 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 06:09.
Research-grade iNaturalist observations via GBIF, CC0 or CC BY licences only, queried on 2026-10-09 06:09.
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: 6 of 6
is a host of
×
has as a host
×
is eaten by
×
is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of
×
interacts with
×
has its flowers 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
17 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
Pseudocercospora acrocarpicolaMycosphaerellaceae
is a host of
5
no location
5 sources · 5 records
Pande, A., and Rao, V.G.. 1998. A Compendium Fungi on Legumes from India. Scientific Publishers (India), Jodhpur :188
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L3802091
No public URL for this record
Crous, P.W., and Braun, U.. 2003. %Mycosphaerella% and its anamorphs: 1. Names published in %Cercospora% and %Passalora%. Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, Utrecht :571
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L3815681
No public URL for this record
Kamal. 2010. Cercosporoid fungi of India. Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh, Dehra Dun, India :351
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4115945
No public URL for this record
Sarbhoy, A.K., Lal, G., and Varshney, J.L.. 1971. Fungi of India (1967-71). Navyug Traders, New Delhi :148
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4212769
No public URL for this record
Agnihothrudu, V.. 1971. A leaf spot of %Acrocarpus fraxinifolius% W.. Curr. Sci. 40:20-21
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4387017
No public URL for this record
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Honey FungusArmillaria melleaPhysalacriaceae
is a host of
3
no location
3 sources · 3 records
Nattrass, R.M.. 1961. Host lists of Kenya fungi and bacteria. Mycol. Pap. 81:1-46
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: Kenya · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Kenya · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4082790
No public URL for this record
Spaulding, P.. 1961. Foreign Diseases of Forest Trees of the World. U.S.D.A. Agric. Handb. 197:1-361
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: Tanzania · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Tanzania · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4110799
No public URL for this record
Riley, E.A.. 1960. A revised list of plant diseases in Tanganyika Territory. Mycol. Pap. 75:1-42
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: Tanzania · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Tanzania · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4137068
No public URL for this record
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Lacquered BracketGanoderma lucidum
is a host of
3
no location
3 sources · 3 records
Pande, A., and Rao, V.G.. 1998. A Compendium Fungi on Legumes from India. Scientific Publishers (India), Jodhpur :188
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L3801944
No public URL for this record
Spaulding, P.. 1961. Foreign Diseases of Forest Trees of the World. U.S.D.A. Agric. Handb. 197:1-361
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4105997
No public URL for this record
Sarbhoy, A.K., and Agarwal, D.K.. 1990. Descriptions of Tropical Plant Pathogenic Fungi. Set 1.. Malhotra Publ. House, New Delhi :--
Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host
Context: India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L4155641
No public URL for this record
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Cephalosporium
is a host of
1
no location
Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
1 source · 1 record
Sarah E Miller. 5/23/2017. Species associations manually extracted from Anderson, R. L. (1986). Checklist of micro-organisms associated with tree seeds in the world, 1985. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-39. Asheville, NC: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Exp…
Published in jhammock/Checklist-of-Micro-Organisms-Associated-With-Tree-Seeds-in-the-World
Context: no place published · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L1158138
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
Cephalosporium
has as a host
1
no location
Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
1 source · 2 records
Mathur, S.B. Fungi recorded in seeds of forest tree species at the Danish Government Institute of Seed Pathology, Copenhagen: Institute of Seed Pathology; 1984, 12 pp.
Published in millerse/Checklist-of-Micro-Organisms-Associated-With-Tree-Seeds-in-the-World
Record contexts (sample): Rwanda · no date published; Rwanda · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Rwanda · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L158205
Rwanda · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/refuted-interactions.tsv.gz!/L591
No public URL for this record
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Fusarium incarnatumNectriaceae
has as a host
1
no location
1 source · 4 records
Mathur, S.B. Fungi recorded in seeds of forest tree species at the Danish Government Institute of Seed Pathology, Copenhagen: Institute of Seed Pathology; 1984, 12 pp.
Published in millerse/Checklist-of-Micro-Organisms-Associated-With-Tree-Seeds-in-the-World
Record contexts (sample): Rwanda · no date published; India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Rwanda · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L158173
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L158177
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/refuted-interactions.tsv.gz!/L597
And 1 more record of this source, not listed here.
No public URL for this record
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Myrothecium roridum
has as a host
Refuted
1
no location
1 source · 1 record
Mathur, S.B. Fungi recorded in seeds of forest tree species at the Danish Government Institute of Seed Pathology, Copenhagen: Institute of Seed Pathology; 1984, 12 pp.
Published in jhammock/Checklist-of-Micro-Organisms-Associated-With-Tree-Seeds-in-the-World
Context: Rwanda · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Rwanda · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/refuted-interactions.tsv.gz!/L599
No public URL for this record
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Fusarium fujikuroiNectriaceae
has as a host
1
no location
1 source · 4 records
Mathur, S.B. Fungi recorded in seeds of forest tree species at the Danish Government Institute of Seed Pathology, Copenhagen: Institute of Seed Pathology; 1984, 12 pp.
Published in millerse/Checklist-of-Micro-Organisms-Associated-With-Tree-Seeds-in-the-World
Record contexts (sample): Rwanda · no date published; India · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Rwanda · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L158189
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L158190
India · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/refuted-interactions.tsv.gz!/L595
And 1 more record of this source, not listed here.
No public URL for this record
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
This term does declare that the organism harms this species.
Organism
Reads as
Studies
Where it was documented
Actions
Pyrops condorinusFulgoridae
is eaten by
2
no location
2 sources · 3 records
@article{136901, author = {Jiaranaisakul, Kawin and Voraphab, Itsarapong and Constant, Jérôme}, journal = {Journal of Entomology}, month = {may}, day = {24}, pages = {1–15}, title = {Redescription of <i>Pyrops condorinus</i> with new distribution records from Thailan…
Published in globalbioticinteractions/taxonworks
Record contexts (sample): no place published · no date published; no place published · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L5983618
no place published · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L5983619
No public URL for this record
@article{211283, author = {Jiaranaisakul, Kawin and Constant, Jérôme and Pinkaew, Nantasak}, journal = {Zootaxa}, month = {jan}, day = {3}, number = {1}, pages = {47-79}, publisher = {Magnolia Press}, title = {Review of the lanternfly genus <i>Pyrops</i> of Thail…
Published in globalbioticinteractions/taxonworks
Context: no place published · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L5990228
Context: no place published · Jan. 21, 2026 · Human observation
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · Jan. 21, 2026 · Human observationAs published: 2026-01-21T07:51:44Z · HumanObservationWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L5346894
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Rat Spp.Maxomys suriferMuridae
is eaten by
1
no location
1 source · 1 record
Susuki, S. Kitamura, S. Kon, M. Poonswad, P. Chuailua, P. Plngmai, K. Yumoto, T. Noma, N. Maruhashi, T. Wohandee, P. 2007. Fruit visitation patterns of small mammals on the forest floor in a tropical seasonal forest of Thailand. TROPICS. Vol 16 (1).
Published in fgabriel1891/Plant-Frugivore-Interactions-SouthEastAsia
Context: Khao Yai National Park, Thailand · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
Khao Yai National Park, Thailand · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L2184385
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Cricula SilkmothCricula trifenestrataSaturniidae
is eaten by
1
no location
1 source · 2 records
Edward Baker; Ian Kitching; George W Beccaloni; Amoret Whitaker; Steen Dupont; Vincent Smith; John S Noyes (2017). NHM Interactions Bank. https://doi.org/10.5519/0060767. Accessed at <https://data.nhm.ac.uk/dataset/82e807f0-6273-4f19-be0a-7f7558442a25/resource/f84ad9f1-bd0c-4811…
Published in globalbioticinteractions/natural-history-museum-london-interactions-bank
Record contexts (sample): no place published · no date published; no place published · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L18747287
no place published · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L18747508
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
Glomus multicauleGlomeraceae
is an arbuscular mycorrhizal host of
1
not compared
1 source · 1 record
S. Pehim Limbu, S.L. Stürmer, G. Zahn, C.A. Aguilar-Trigueros, N. Rogers, & V.B. Chaudhary, Climate-linked biogeography of mycorrhizal fungal spore traits, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 122 (29) e2505059122, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2505059122 (2025). Accessed at <https://gi…
Published in globalbioticinteractions/limbu2025
Context: no place published · no date published
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · no date publishedWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L13432073
Context: no place published · Feb. 8, 2021 · Human observation
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · Feb. 8, 2021 · Human observationAs published: 2021-02-08T06:37:00Z · HumanObservationWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L5703099
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
Showing 1 of 1, by number of studies
Flower visit
has its flowers 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. 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
Hill MynasGracula religiosaSturnidae
has its flowers visited by
1
not compared
1 source · 1 record
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/69988975
Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist
Context: no place published · Feb. 21, 2021 · Human observation
Claim type
Published relationship between two taxa
Version
GloBI 0.11
Reuse
This release publishes no reuse terms for this record.
no place published · Feb. 21, 2021 · Human observationAs published: 2021-02-21T00:38:00Z · HumanObservationWhere it is: line:hash://sha256/021a206a1459bcca7e251c73f5bd180fc3ac342a09c499855fe42e21fc09edcf!/interactions.tsv.gz!/L5708428
A published relationship says these two taxa were documented interacting. It does not say how often, or that it happens in this project's region.
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.
