DavidHowdon's picture

Top level

A problem which was in the old database remains. The highest level IDs are linked to the category "other organisms".

For instance when I entered 'Fish' as the ID for http://www.ispot.org.uk/node/349507 this was assigned to the category other organisms. Presumably a fish should be in the fish category.



Tony Rebelo's picture

This is because "Pisces" is

This is because "Pisces" is not a taxonomy item: it is not in the Taxonomy dictionary. And the reason for this is that it is not a valid taxon name.

We have a full heirarchy in the ZA website (Teleostei > Euteleostei > Acanthopterygii), but for the UK it seems "Actinopterygii" is your highest category approaching 'Fish'. If you use "Actinopterygii" then the taxonomy links will work.

Start here: http://www.ispot.org.uk/species_dictionary/Actinopterygii

DavidHowdon's picture


That may be "why" it is the case but given it is in the iSpot taxonomy database and an option selected from the list, even if it is not in "the Taxonomy dictionary", it probably makes sense if it be linked correctly in iSpot.

ChrisR's picture

That's an interesting

That's an interesting conundrum, caused by the fact that our taxonomic hierarchy is currently setup to use the basic Darwin-Core standards. It was a herculean job to create this structure and Charles knew that to insert all of the sub-ranks would probably double the work, so it was decided to start with kingdom->phylum->class->order->family->genus->species (etc)

I don't think there is any logical reason why we shouldn't link-in the sub-ranks at some time and if this fixes these problems then I am all for it. I will chat to people down here and see if there is any reason why we shouldn't start linking a few in. :)