| genus name | citation | reason |
|---|---|---|
| Trillium L. | Species Plantarum 339 1753 |
"trigynia hexandria" |
| Paris L. | Species Plantarum 367 1753 |
"tetragynia octandria" |
| Alopicarpous Neck. | Elem. 2:369 1790 | because "Paris, vox gallica," was too significant and should be rejected as a genus name. |
| Demidovia Hoffm. | Hort. Mosq. f.2 1808 | because it was apetalous. |
| Delostylis Raf. | Jour. Phys. 89:102 1819 | because they possessed a common style. |
| Phyllantherum Raf. | Jour. Phys. 91:72 1820 | because they lacked a pedicel. |
| Cartalinia Szov. in Kunth | Enum. Pl. 5:119 1836 | in synonymy for Paris incompleta M.Bieb. |
| Daiswa Raf. | Fl. Tell. 4:18 1836 | because they were 5-merous. |
| Trillidium Kunth | Enum. Pl. 5:120 1850 | because it was halfway between Paris and Trillium. The whole perianth was colored, the anther dehiscence was extrorse, the stigma was subulate, and the perianth was hexamerous. |
| Esdra Salisb. | Gen. Pl. Frag. 60 1866 | because all its organs strictly sessile. |
| Euthrya Salisb. | Gen. Pl. Frag. 61 1866 | because it has a capsular fruit with a common style. |
| Kinugasa Tatewaki and Sutô | Trans. Sapporo Nat. Hist. Soc. 14:34 1935 | different from Paris because of petaloid sepals and caespitose habit; different from Trillium by the shape of the leaves and the number of floral parts; and different from Trillidium by rhizome characters, merosity, and shape of pistil and leaves. |
| Pseudotrillium S.Farmer | Systematic Botany 27: 687-688 |
different from Trillium due to spotted petals; different from Trillidium due to petaloid not tepaloid inflorescence; different from Paris because of broad petals, thick rhizome, and seed aril; different from Kinugasa because it has colored sepals and filiform petals; and different from Daiswa because it has narrow petals, dehiscent capsules, and a complete aril. |