EXTINCT ATLAS WIKIEXTINCT LIFE ARCHIVE
Maui Hau Kuahiwi (Hibiscadelphus wilderianus) · scientific reconstructionView original image

This is an original generative reconstruction, not a photograph or scientific plate.

Maui Hau Kuahiwi

Hibiscadelphus wilderianus

The only scientifically recorded tree bore curved yellow-green tubular flowers probably adapted to Hawaiian honeycreepers.

Structured expansion · editorial review pending

Time range
Prehistory–about 1912
Final stage
Early 20th century
Geographic range
Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi

What was Maui Hau Kuahiwi?

This archive records Maui Hau Kuahiwi under the scientific name Hibiscadelphus wilderianus, with an age of Prehistory–about 1912 and a range of Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi. The only scientifically recorded tree bore curved yellow-green tubular flowers probably adapted to Hawaiian honeycreepers.

Hibiscadelphus wilderianus was a roughly five-meter mallow tree with heart-shaped leaves covered in stellate hairs. Its petals formed a bent tube around an extended style and red anthers.

Maui Hau Kuahiwi at a glance

Scientific name
Hibiscadelphus wilderianus
Age
Prehistory–about 1912
Last recorded stage
Early 20th century
Known range
Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi
Broad group
plant
Archive era
Recently extinct
Habitat signals
Forest
Documented regions
Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi

How was Maui Hau Kuahiwi built?

Overall body plan

The only scientifically recorded tree bore curved yellow-green tubular flowers probably adapted to Hawaiian honeycreepers.

Growth architecture

The available record is interpreted through preserved proportions, attachment surfaces, wear and comparison with related organisms. For Maui Hau Kuahiwi, those observations must be separated from features added only for visual reconstruction.

Reproductive structures

Hibiscadelphus wilderianus was a roughly five-meter mallow tree with heart-shaped leaves covered in stellate hairs. Its petals formed a bent tube around an extended style and red anthers.

Growth and individual variation

A single specimen does not define the whole species. Size, maturity, preservation and possible sex differences are considered before anatomical traits are treated as typical of Maui Hau Kuahiwi.

EukaryotaArchaeplastidaPlantaeHibiscadelphus wilderianus

How did Maui Hau Kuahiwi live?

Hibiscadelphus wilderianus was a roughly five-meter mallow tree with heart-shaped leaves covered in stellate hairs. Its petals formed a bent tube around an extended style and red anthers. This ecological reconstruction is strongest where anatomy, associated organisms and the depositional setting point in the same direction.

What shaped its ecological limits?

Its populations depended on plant communities, soils, water availability and climate. Changes in any one factor did not necessarily cause immediate extinction, but interacting pressures could reduce range, recruitment and resilience.

Where and when did Maui Hau Kuahiwi live?

This archive currently lists Prehistory–about 1912; Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi. Fossil or historical occurrence data describe where evidence has been found, not every place the taxon once occupied. Species-level age and range limits still require source-specific review.

01

Documented geographic range

Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi. This boundary can change when specimens are reidentified or new localities are published.

02

Time window

Prehistory–about 1912, with the final recorded stage listed as Early 20th century. Rock units and dating uncertainty mean the true biological range may extend beyond the known record.

03

Environmental setting

The archive uses the broad habitat labels Forest. These labels help explore related records; a habitat reconstruction requires evidence from individual localities.

What evidence supports reconstructions of Maui Hau Kuahiwi?

01

Primary record

The single tree found in 1910, a 1912 seed collection, the type sheet and botanical drawings provide all direct evidence.

02

Comparative anatomy

Preserved structures are compared with close and functionally similar organisms. The method can constrain posture and function, but analogy alone cannot prove colour, behaviour or soft tissue.

03

Age and locality

Stratigraphy and occurrence records place Maui Hau Kuahiwi within Prehistory–about 1912 and Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi. Reworked fossils and uncertain provenance are treated cautiously.

04

Open entity records

Links below connect the archive to available taxonomic and occurrence records. A matching name does not verify every ecological claim, and related-taxon links provide comparison rather than an exact species match.

Why did Maui Hau Kuahiwi disappear?

Cattle, goats and pigs degraded dry forest; invasive grasses, fire and declining pollinator birds likely compounded the loss.

The last fossil or observation marks the youngest evidence currently known, not necessarily the death of the final individual. Explanations are strongest when timing, environmental change and population biology agree; otherwise the profile preserves uncertainty instead of assigning a single dramatic cause.

Maui Hau Kuahiwi FAQ

What was Maui Hau Kuahiwi?

This archive records Maui Hau Kuahiwi under the scientific name Hibiscadelphus wilderianus, with an age of Prehistory–about 1912. The only scientifically recorded tree bore curved yellow-green tubular flowers probably adapted to Hawaiian honeycreepers.

When did Maui Hau Kuahiwi live?

The current archive range is Prehistory–about 1912; its youngest recorded stage is Early 20th century.

Where was Maui Hau Kuahiwi found?

The archive currently lists Dry forest on Haleakalā's southern slope, Maui, Hawaiʻi. Species-level locality assignments and the full geographic range still require source-specific review.

How do scientists know about Maui Hau Kuahiwi?

The single tree found in 1910, a 1912 seed collection, the type sheet and botanical drawings provide all direct evidence.

Check the source record

Use the scientific name to compare taxonomy, occurrence records and the fossil record. Database coverage and classifications may differ.

How has this record changed?

  1. Completed an AI-assisted bilingual audit of the archive record, corrected identified issues and clarified evidence limits; independent editorial review is pending.
  2. Expanded into a structured bilingual profile with anatomy, ecology, range, evidence, debate and FAQs; independent editorial review is pending.
  3. Verified authoritative entity sources and added three responsive reconstruction sizes.
  4. Initial bilingual species record published.

Found an error or a better source?

Submit a correction