desert sumac (Rhus microphylla)

Identidad taxonómica

Scientific name: Rhus microphylla Engelm.
Canonical name: The scientific name without its authorship or date, for example Zea mays instead of Zea mays L.: Rhus microphylla
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.: Engelm.
Common names: desert sumac, scrub sumac, small-leaf sumac
Names in other languages (6)
Littleleaf sumac, Wüsten-Sumach, agrillo, correosa, sumak drobnolistny, 小葉鹽膚木
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).: Anacardiaceae
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.: Rhus
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.: microphylla
Taxonomic rank: The level a name occupies in the hierarchy of biological classification, such as kingdom, family, genus, species or subspecies.: species
Reference species: Rhus microphylla
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 available.

No photos have been requested for this species yet.

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: 7 of 7 interacts with (this species is the record's destination) × is visited by × interacts with (this species is the record's origin) × is a host of × is eaten by × has its flowers visited by × is adjacent to ×

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.

interacts with 28 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
Aculops arizonarhus Eriophyidae	interacts with	4	not compared
4 sources · 4 records https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/33605083 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · Sept. 29, 2019 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/177552001 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · July 12, 2023 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/67097674 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · Dec. 20, 2020 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/181308224 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · Sept. 1, 2023 · Human observation 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.
Colletes birkmanni Colletidae	interacts with	3	not compared
3 sources · 3 records 332fe19c-1ed6-11e3-bfac-90b11c41863e Published in globalbioticinteractions/ku-semc Context: Albany · April 9, 1950 · Preserved specimen 332fe574-1ed6-11e3-bfac-90b11c41863e Published in globalbioticinteractions/ku-semc Context: Albany · April 9, 1950 · Preserved specimen 42bc1279-1ed6-11e3-bfac-90b11c41863e Published in globalbioticinteractions/ku-semc Context: Albany · April 9, 1950 · Preserved specimen 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.
Aculops rhois Eriophyidae	interacts with	2	not compared
2 sources · 2 records https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102344523 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · Aug. 14, 2021 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/143417871 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · Oct. 24, 2022 · Human observation 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.
Matsumurasca dilitara Cicadellidae	interacts with	2	no location
2 sources · 2 records https://ecdysis.org/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4240558 Published in globalbioticinteractions/ecdysis Context: no place published · Sept. 13, 1997 · Preserved specimen https://ecdysis.org/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4240562 Published in globalbioticinteractions/ecdysis Context: no place published · Sept. 13, 1997 · Preserved specimen 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 4 of 28, by number of studies See more of this type

is visited by 25 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
Gray Hairstreak Strymon melinus Lycaenidae	is visited by	5	not compared
5 sources · 5 records https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/344047570 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 18, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/344047595 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 18, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/344613972 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 19, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346075434 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/71375961 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 16, 2021 · Human observation 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.
Broad-headed Marsh Fly Helophilus latifrons Syrphidae	is visited by	4	not compared
4 sources · 4 records https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346075331 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346244979 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346245042 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346245045 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation 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.
Podalonia Sphecidae	is visited by	4	not compared	Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
4 sources · 4 records https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/344047604 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 18, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346075437 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346075448 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/347572910 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation 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.
Painted Lady Vanessa cardui	is visited by	4	not compared
4 sources · 4 records https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/344047589 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 18, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/344047591 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 18, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/344047598 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 18, 2026 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/346244994 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 24, 2026 · Human observation 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 4 of 25, by number of studies See more of this type

interacts with 10 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
largeflower eveningprimrose Oenothera grandis Onagraceae	interacts with	1	not compared
1 source · 1 record 07d9e08a-fc8c-11e7-a803-a36fdaf81e2b Published in globalbioticinteractions/usgs-bison Context: Eldorado; 0.5 mi W & 5.5 mi S of Eldorado on rd 1850 · 0003-01-01T00:00:00Z · Preserved specimen 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.
Feverfew Parthenium Asteraceae	interacts with	1	not compared	Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
1 source · 1 record https://arctos.database.museum/guid/UTEP:Herb:20032 Published in globalbioticinteractions/vertnet Context: 15.9 miles S of Saltillo, Saltillo · Aug. 28, 1967 · Preserved specimen 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.
juniper Juniperus Cupressaceae	interacts with	1	not compared	Not a modelling unit: the source publishes it at genus level.
1 source · 1 record https://arctos.database.museum/guid/UTEP:Herb:20032 Published in globalbioticinteractions/vertnet Context: 15.9 miles S of Saltillo, Saltillo · Aug. 28, 1967 · Preserved specimen 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.
fan-leaf vervain Verbena plicata	interacts with	1	not compared
1 source · 1 record 07d9e08a-fc8c-11e7-a803-a36fdaf81e2b Published in globalbioticinteractions/usgs-bison Context: Eldorado; 0.5 mi W & 5.5 mi S of Eldorado on rd 1850 · 0003-01-01T00:00:00Z · Preserved specimen 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 4 of 10, by number of studies See more of this type

is a host of 6 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
Pileolaria patzcuarensis Pileolariaceae	is a host of	5	not compared
5 sources · 5 records https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622335 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Big Bend National Park · Sept. 24, 1993 · Preserved specimen https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622336 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Big Bend National Park · Sept. 26, 1992 · Preserved specimen https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622337 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Chisos Mountains, Big Bend National Park · Oct. 5, 1996 · Preserved specimen https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622338 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Big Bend National Park · Sept. 26, 1992 · Preserved specimen Cummins, G.B.. 1965. Additional Uredinales of the Big Bend area of Texas.. Southw. Naturalist 10:35-38 Published in globalbioticinteractions/usda-fungus-host Context: United States · no date published 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.
Batyle ignicollis Cerambycidae	is a host of	2	no location
2 sources · 2 records https://scan-bugs.org:443/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=48927036 Published in globalbioticinteractions/scan Context: 7 miles W Dickens · 0003-05-01T00:00:00Z · Preserved specimen https://scan-bugs.org:443/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=48927035 Published in globalbioticinteractions/scan Context: 7 miles W Dickens · 0007-05-01T00:00:00Z · Preserved specimen 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.
Aneflomorpha seminuda Cerambycidae	is a host of	1	no location
1 source · 1 record https://scan-bugs.org:443/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=48936473 Published in globalbioticinteractions/scan Context: 7 miles W Dickens · 0027-07-01T00:00:00Z · Preserved specimen 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.
Chinati Sheepmoth Hemileuca chinatiensis Saturniidae	is a host of	1	no location
1 source · 2 records Gaden S. Robinson; Phillip R. Ackery; Ian Kitching; George W Beccaloni; Luis M. Hernández (2023). HOSTS (from HOSTS - a Database of the World's Lepidopteran Hostplants) [Data set resource]. Natural History Museum. https://data.nhm.ac.uk/dataset/hosts/resource/877f387a-36a3-486c-… Published in globalbioticinteractions/HOSTS Record contexts (sample): USA · no date published; Nearctic · no date published 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 4 of 6, by number of studies See more of this type

is eaten by 5 organisms

This term does declare that the organism harms this species.

Organism	Reads as	Studies	Where it was documented
Juniper Hairstreak Callophrys gryneus	is eaten by	2	not compared
2 sources · 2 records https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/10235884 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 14, 2018 · Human observation https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/71375783 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 16, 2021 · Human observation 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.
Gray Hairstreak Strymon melinus Lycaenidae	is eaten by	1	not compared
1 source · 1 record https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/71375961 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 16, 2021 · Human observation 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.
Mesquite Borer Placosternus difficilis	is eaten by	1	not compared
1 source · 1 record https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/71375967 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 16, 2021 · Human observation 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.
Great Purple Hairstreak Atlides halesus Lycaenidae	is eaten by	1	not compared
1 source · 1 record https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/71375973 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 16, 2021 · Human observation 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 4 of 5, by number of studies See more of this type

Flower visit

has its flowers visited by 3 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
Heraclides rumiko	has its flowers visited by	1	not compared
1 source · 1 record https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/809509 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · July 30, 2014 · Human observation 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.
Macoupin County Miner Bee Andrena macoupinensis Andrenidae	has its flowers visited by	1	no location
1 source · 4 records LaBerge, Wallace E. A Revision of the Bees of the Genus Andrena of the Western Hemisphere. Part X. Subgenus Andrena. Transactions of the American Entomological Society (1890-), vol. 106, no. 4, 1980, pp. 395–525. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25078273. Accessed 22 June 2020. Published in Extended-Bee-Network/bee-interaction-database Record contexts (sample): no place published · no date published; no place published · no date published 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.
Monarch Danaus plexippus Nymphalidae	has its flowers visited by	1	not compared
1 source · 1 record https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/40823122 Published in globalbioticinteractions/inaturalist Context: no place published · March 27, 2020 · Human observation 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 3 of 3, 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
Pileolaria patzcuarensis Pileolariaceae	is adjacent to	4	not compared
4 sources · 4 records https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622335 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Big Bend National Park · Sept. 24, 1993 · Preserved specimen https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622336 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Big Bend National Park · Sept. 26, 1992 · Preserved specimen https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622337 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Chisos Mountains, Big Bend National Park · Oct. 5, 1996 · Preserved specimen https://mycoportal.org/portal/collections/individual/index.php?occid=4622338 Published in globalbioticinteractions/mycoportal Context: Window Trail, Big Bend National Park · Sept. 26, 1992 · Preserved specimen 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

Interaction data from Global Biotic Interactions (GloBI), GloBI 0.11. Each row keeps the citation its own study published.

Interactions are published at species level: they are not resolved by variety or race.

Each block is headed by the source's own term, read from this species' end — not by a category of ours. Two similar terms are not merged.

«Documented here» means the interaction was observed in this territory. It is not evidence that the species is here, and it does not enter the niche model.

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.