All species of Euphorbia sect. Anisophyllum added to sect. Anisophyllum in iNaturalist

It's taken longer than it should have, but I have now finished adding all the species known to be in sect. Anisophyllum to the sect. Anisophyllum taxon in iNaturalist. This means that you can now view the names of all the species in the section by simply looking at the taxon profile page: https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/506796-Anisophyllum
There are still some synonymy issues for a few species that I'll have to look into at some point, but this should be more than enough until more observations start coming in from the regions that have the aforementioned species.

The next step would be to try to add in the ranges for all of these, but I'm not sure I'll ever get around to doing that. What I'm trying to focus on more is finding what species have been photographed and which haven't in order to focus outreach efforts on geographic regions with high numbers of species without photos (that is, when I'm not focusing on Ph.D. work or can find a way to tie it into Ph.D. work).

Also, all Euphorbia species that have been recognized at section level by Euphorbia PBI (www.euphorbiaceae.org) have now been grafted into their respective section in iNaturalist except for the following sections:
Esula (6 taxa to add; 36 species to add to section)
Helioscopia (6 taxa to add; 45 species to add to section)
Euphorbia (34 taxa to add; 174 species to add to section)
Monadenium (1 species to add; 61 species to add to section)

This doesn't include the many synonymy contradictions nor the very likely possibility that I made mistakes. Also, not all Euphorbia species are known to section level yet. That said, if anyone wants to finish up what I started, these last four sections are the largest and most time-consuming taxa to change (except sect. Anisophyllum, which I took care of). The help would be much appreciated (@trh_blue, want another project :-)). After this is done, it will be a matter of looking at the remaining ungrafted species in Euphorbia to see if they or their synonyms are recognized at section or subgenus level. I doubt all will ever be fully grafted as the taxonomy isn't fully known yet, but we can get a lot of the way there.

פורסם על-ידי nathantaylor nathantaylor, ינואר 09, 2021 04:44 לפנה"צ

תגובות

You are awesome, Nathan! That's a lot of time and effort. Thanks for sharing.

פורסם על-ידי connlindajo לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

Euphorbia PBI link is dead to me
(ie, 404)
but..... yeeees??
I've tried to graft some of the ungrafted species in the genus, but find it very difficult to find sources that include information on subgenus or section. Doing more work as a Curator is on my to-do list. So are.... way too many other things.
I've made a few atlases, but I'd need good sources for that, too. Considering the sheer number of invasive species, I worry I won't be able to keep them up-to-date, though.

פורסם על-ידי trh_blue לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

Thanks Linda!
@trh_blue How odd on the Euphorbia PBI link. I messed with it a little and it should work now. Unfortunately, the database itself is down most of the time and I'm relying on data that I downloaded before it went down last time. As far as I know, it is the only source besides primary literature that has any reliable information on subgenus and sectional information. If you'd like, I can send the spreadsheets to you, though the iNaturalist lists should explain things pretty well.
Regarding atlases, yeah, I try not to use them as the full distributions of many species likely aren't even known. Once you include weedy species, using atlases seems like the wrong approach. I wish there was a way to add locations easily like atlases without the pressure that comes with atlases having to be right.

פורסם על-ידי nathantaylor לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

I prefer a spreadsheet to your iNat lists, since that way I can edit it directly as I progress. I can make a duplicate copy for myself. Assuming you've also noted there what species have been added / grafted?
I don't remember whether atlases are expected to be complete... @jdmore what's etiquette on that? Unless they're being used for a split, I don't see why I couldn't make a partial atlas so long as I left a comment saying as much.
in any case, very little to none of this is getting done before... let's see... I'm booked through Friday at least. hmm. And technically the next thing I wanted to add to my to do list was some Wikipedia stuff.... so.... uh............ it may take some time. rip me

פורסם על-ידי trh_blue לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

No particular etiquette on atlases, depends on the purpose they are serving. If for a split, they need only be complete enough to cover the observations being affected at the time the split is committed. Completeness is always nice in principle, of course, but not always possible.

פורסם על-ידי jdmore לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

@trh_blue I completely understand if you don't want to work on it. Honestly, I was thinking about the Euphorbia ID workshop and was wondering if you wanted to do this to maybe get some familiarity with the more difficult sections in addition to filling in a gap. I'll send you the worksheets, though it should be as easy as opening each name in a new tab from the iNat list, modifying it to the correct section, then checking via taxonomy view to make sure it grafted ok. After doing hundreds of these, it's so much easier than copying and pasting the names into the species view.
@jdmore Good to know. I just remember messing with them early on and someone saying that it flagged observations as out of range. As such, I decided to stop messing with them as I didn't want to put the time into figuring out everywhere the species had been documented to simply add a location in the map that the species occurs in. I tend to take a more piecemeal approach that doesn't seem to work well with atlases (e.g., adding information for one location at a time that has a good monograph).

פורסם על-ידי nathantaylor לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

I'm happy to! It's just not at the top of the to-do list right now. And also, it bugs me a lot when I notice stuff that is incorrectly grafted and having the resources needed to fix that would make me happier. I don't love repetitive work, but if I were to spend 15 minutes a day adding and grafting taxa it would be done in no time.

פורסם על-ידי trh_blue לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

@trh_blue Sent you an email. :-)

פורסם על-ידי nathantaylor לפני כמעט 2 שנים (סמן)

הוספת תגובה

כניסה או הרשמה להוספת הערות