Martin Harvey's picture

Species dictionary feedback forum - guidelines

This forum is for reporting any issues to do with the UK and Ireland species dictionary used on iSpot - if you think a name is incorrect, or if any of the name links and taxon hierarchies take you to the wrong place, please let us know.

The names we use for the UK and Ireland community are supplied by the UK Species Inventory (UKSI) project, managed by the Natural History Museum in London. We won't normally change names on iSpot if that would make us inconsistent with the UKSI, but please report any errors in the names and we will pass them on to the UKSI; or alternatively you can report them direct via an NBN species inventory forum.

A similar forum for the southern Africa community species dictionary is available here:
http://www.ispotnature.org/dictionary_updates

For more general information on iSpot's use of species dictionaries see:
http://www.ispotnature.org/faq-species-dictionaries

Reply

Comments

martinjohnbishop's picture

Trichius rosaceus

Following discussion at http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/349436 with Mydaea I posted a comment at http://forums.nbn.org.uk/viewtopic.php?id=4727
Regards,
Martin

Martin Harvey's picture

Trichius names

Thanks for pursuing that Martin. The latest UK Coleoptera checklist uses gallicus, so it would be good to bring things into line, even if it will take some time for the updates to work through the system and arrive here on iSpot.

The current (2012) UK checklist can be downloaded from:
http://www.coleopterist.org.uk/checklist.htm

----
Entomologist and biological recorder

martinjohnbishop's picture

Revision is done

ChrisRToday 15:32:50
Administrator
Offline
Registered: 27-08-2011
Posts: 277
Hi Martin
I have revised the Trichius spp. using Andrew Duff's 2012 list. This involved creating T. gallicus:
Trichius gallicus Dejean, 1821
tvk NHMSYS0020979149
This is now the accepted name for:
Trichius rosaceus (Voët, 1769) (Species, insect - beetle (Coleoptera))
Trichius abdominalis sensu auctt. Brit. non (Ménétries, 1832)
Trichius abdominalis sensu auct. not Menetries, 1832
Trichius zonatus sensu auctt. Brit. non Germar, 1831
Best wishes,
Chris R.
Chris Raper, Manager of the UK Species Inventory, Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity,
Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD. (tel: 020 7942 5894)
also Tachinid Recording Scheme (http://tachinidae.org.uk/)

Martin Harvey's picture

updates

Thanks Martin, that's good news, but as I mentioned before I'm not yet sure when we'll be able to next update the UKSI dictionary on iSpot. It will happen eventually though!

----
Entomologist and biological recorder

Thistle's picture

Common Feather-moss (Kindbergia praelonga)

Please see my observation at http://www.ispotnature.org/node/391627. Which is the currently accepted name, Kindbergia praelonga or Eurhynchium praelongum?

Ian

dejayM's picture

Trouble Martin

Martin - I think you know about the current issues facing posters who cannot make posts in using UKSI Dictionary. Mine and a few others seem to default to CoL, even though I am clearly posting in UK&I.
See my typical one (of many)
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/391967
Plenty of others have had trouble very recently.
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/392139
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/392128
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/392114
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/392108
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/392098

I've tried a few things; so,
can you say HOW I can be certain a post will use the UKSI Dictionary?
ðerek

Martin Harvey's picture

names

Ian, I've added a reply to your observation at the link above.

----
Entomologist and biological recorder

dejayM's picture

a solution?

Things have move on for me. After trying as many fixes as I could think of, I logged out, closed down my computer, opened and logged in again. I think this might reset my 'values' at the iSpot server. Of course I made certain that, throughout this process, UK&I was my Community.
Two perfect posts this morning
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/392245
http://www.ispotnature.org/node/392233
no looking back? Hope so.
ðerek
PS I think there is a small associated issue with Likelihood - see http://www.ispotnature.org/node/391917#comment-147384
ð

dejayM's picture

hit and miss

Martin, it was hit and miss yesterday (26th Feb) see all the Global posts?
I am registered with ZA, see this http://www.ispot.org.za/node/239236#comment-134448
Regards
ðerek

Tony Rebelo's picture

PLEASE UPDATE

Please update this for the different iSpot communities.

For southern Africa the place to note dictionary problems is www.ispotnature.org/dictionary_updates

How does one go about noting omissions in the CoL : the Chile plant species list is only about 1/3 of the species!

Martin Harvey's picture

Updated

I've updated the text at the top of the forum. My understanding is that Catalogue of Life (http://www.catalogueoflife.org/) is a compilation of existing authoritative taxon dictionaries, so any corrections or additions would have to go through one of the contributing organisations, but I'm afraid that's not something iSpot has any direct involvement with.

----
Entomologist and biological recorder

Tony Rebelo's picture

But

We might be able to get the Chileans to contribute to CoL so that the dictionary in their part of the world works better.

SANBI contributes to CoL and EoL as a national organization, and I would expect the Chilean departments to be active in the same spheres. It is just a matter of greasing the wheels and helping out if needed.

Riaan Stals's picture

CoL is a Corporation

I honestly doubt that SANBI contributes to CoL. I may be wrong; too lazy to look it up.

You already know my opinion about the scientific status of CoL. I have the same opinion about its politics.

 
Beetledude

guyatmbe's picture

Peacock butterfly

The dictionary is nor recognizing Aglais io as the new correct scientific name. See http://www.ispotnature.org/node/657120

Please can this be fixed?

Guy

jimmymac2's picture

I agree

I am used to using the name 'Inachis io' but when I conducted a recent poll (http://www.ispotnature.org/node/656640) two thirds of everyone who agreed chose to use 'Aglais io'.

James
My Blog
Longworth Traps or The Bryophyte Club!
NBN awards 15 winner.

Laverock's picture

Hierarchy for Nowickia ferox

This fly is a well-known Tachinid, but is being classified as Sciaridae. I assume this is caused by confusion between the valid genus name Nowickia Wachtl, 1894 (Tachinidae) and the invalid homonym Nowickia Kjellander, 1943 (Sciaridae)

MickETalbot's picture

Arctorthezia cataphracta

Order: Hemiptera
Suborder: Sternorrhyncha
Superfamily: Coccoidea
Family: Ortheziidae
Genus: Arctorthezia
Species: Arctorthezia cataphracta (Shaw 1794)

References:

* In the NHM/UKSI inventory, why isn't iSpot picking it up?

Tony Rebelo's picture

please add link to enable

please add link to enable checking of why ...

jimmymac2's picture

Link

http://www.ispotnature.org/node/741725?nav=search
If you want to find the observation in which it is featured, you could just search!

James
My Blog
Longworth Traps or The Bryophyte Club!
NBN awards 15 winner.

Tony Rebelo's picture

or track

much quicker to click user and then track their usage.

I cannot help I am afraid.
All that I did was get myself upset at the use of subgenera in the binomials: how on earth are laymen supposed to cope with those?? Subgenera are NOT part of the Scientific name and should not be included.
ISpot copes beautifully well with the following scenario:

Genus Gladiolus: http://www.ispotnature.org/communities/southern-africa/species-browser/g...
Sugenus Gladiolus (Homoglossum): http://www.ispotnature.org/communities/southern-africa/species-browser/g...
Section Gladiolus (Homoglossum) (Mutabilis): http://www.ispotnature.org/communities/southern-africa/species-browser/g...
But there is no need to inflict the poor user with
Gladiolus (Homoglossum) (Mutabilis) maculatus
the correct name is simply
Gladiolus maculatus: http://www.ispotnature.org/species-dictionaries/sanbi/Gladiolus%20maculatus

All the details are there on iSpot should a user want to see the subgenera and sections, so why expect them to know or use it?
It is utterly irrelevant and should not be shoved down users throats. KISS!!

WolfRoland's picture

Genus Fagus

Genus Fagus in ispot dictionary
Status June 27, 2016

If I want to identify a Fagus species, there are 100 Fagus taxa plus 33 Fagus sylvatica taxa listed in ispot in the moment.

In Wikipedia there are 5 Fagus species and 4 disputed species liste das well as a list of Fagus sylvatica forms.

I suggest to clean up the ispot dictionary. It will not be possible to clearly deliminate the number of species, because different scientists have different opinions.. But at least remove all, that is definitely not correct.

Nothofagus is no Fagus species. In ispot there are 25 taxa listed which belong to Nothofagus – not to Fagus. Most of them even appear under Nothofagus.
No Fagus:
Anarctica plus subsp.; cunninghamii, dombeyi, fusca,colensoi,glauca,gunnii,menziesii,montagnei,moorei,nervosa, nitida, obliqua and its subspecies,

Fagus americana and Fagus sylvatica americana are synonyms of Fagus grandifolia
Fagus aenea, F. comptoniifolia, F. crispa, F. cucullata, F.cuprea, F.echinata, F. sylvestris are all synonyms of Fagus sylvatica and should be removed.

Fagus pendula, Fagus fastigiata, Fagus tortuosa are growth forms of Fagus sylvatica like Fagus sylvatica pyramidalis and not separate species: Fagus sylvatica pendula, F. sylvatica fastigiata, F. sylvatica tortuosa

From the remaining taxa only the following should be retained :

Fagus chienii (under discussion as a separate species)
Fagus crenata
Fagus engleriana
Fagus grandifolia
Fagus hayatae
Fagus japonica
Fagus lucida
Fagus longipetiolata
Fagus mexicana (which most scientists consider a subspecies of Fagus grandifolia)
Fagus orientalis (most consider it a subsp. of Fagus sylvatica)
Fagus moesiaca (mostly considered a subspecies of Fagus sylvatica)

I will not discuss subspecies of the above species

Many of the other taxa are subspecies or even forms of Fagus sylvatica like ‚Asplenifolia’ and should appear there.

Fagus sylvatica has different growth forms (see F.sylvatica pendula above), some subspecies like F. sylvatica moesiaca and more than 100 garden forms (propagated mutations).

The following taxa are synonyms and should also be removed from the dictionary: F. sylvatica macrophylla, F. asiatica, F. hohenackeri, F. hohenackeriana.

Some well known taxa are missing: Fagus sylvatica asplenifolia, Fagus sylvatica cuprea, Fagus sylvatica Incisa, Fagus sylvatica Interrupta, Fagus sylvatica Rohanii, Fagus sylvatica rotundifolia

There are a lot more garden forms of Fagus sylvatica. If observed, they can be mentioned under Comments.

Dr. Wolf-Achim Roland
Solingen, Germany
Wolfachim_roland@yahoo.de

acacia-world.net