We publish our audit record because accuracy claims should be checkable. Every entry on this site runs through an automated fact-audit pipeline (accuracy audit → source-grounded repair → visual QA); this page is generated from that pipeline's own report, not written by hand.
Last full accuracy audit: 2026-08-28 · 5 entries checked · 5 flagged · 16 issues confirmed · 2 corrected · 14 still open
Cucurbitaceae — The claim that the first subfamily (Cucurbitoideae) is not monophyletic is factually incorrect; Cucurbitoideae is widely accepted as monophyletic.
Cucurbitaceae — The statement that the family has been divided into two subfamilies but the first is not monophyletic is misleading because the non-monophyletic group is Zanonioideae in some older treatments.
Ericaceae — The statement that 'the state of Maine growing the majority of lowbush blueberry' is misleading because the entry does not specify 'lowbush' in the first part, so the phrasing could imply Maine grows the majority of all U.S. blueberries, which is false.
Ericaceae — The phrasing about Styphelioideae being 'included in 2002 research' could be read as claiming Styphelioideae was a separate family, which is incorrect; the former separate family is Epacridaceae, now treated as subfamily Styphelioideae.
Apiaceae — [contradicted] First described by: Recognized as a distinct group by Antoine Laurent de Jussieu in 1789 (as Umbelliferae), with earlier herbal references dating to the 16th century :: Source states: 'Apiaceae was first described by John Lindley in 1836.' and '
Apiaceae — [contradicted] Earliest fossils: Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian), with additional Eocene pollen fossils :: Source states: 'The earliest fossils of the group, represented by pollen, date to the Eocene epoch' — does not mention Late Cretaceous or Maastrichtian f
Brassicaceae — [contradicted] Members of Brassicaceae are mostly herbaceous plants, some are shrubs, and very few vines. :: The source states "very few vines" but does not provide a statement explicitly contradicting the presence of vines, so this is not a contradiction; the
Brassicaceae — [contradicted] The family is absent from Antarctica, and also absent from some areas in the tropics, i.e. northeastern Brazil, the Congo Basin, Maritime Southeast Asia and tropical Australasia. :: The source explicitly lists these absences, so no contradiction
Lamiaceae — [contradicted] 'The family includes trees such as teak (Tectona).' :: 'Some species are shrubs, trees (such as teak)...' — so this is correct, not contradicted.
Lamiaceae — [contradicted] The alternative family name Labiatae refers to the flowers' fused petals forming an upper and lower lip. :: 'The alternative family name Labiatae refers to the flowers typically having petals fused into an upper lip and a lower lip (labia in Lat
All content is fetchable as JSON at /data/content/ · llms.txt · sitemap
Spotted an error? Suggest an edit — reader reports go straight into the audit queue.