Taxonomic Swap 39775
(הועלה ב 2018-09-13)
|
|
הוחלף ב |
|
תגובות
If no subspecies considered any more today, nominate subspecies becomes the only one (and subspecies status can be dropped)
@borisb I really wish that people would stop making changes without first doing their research. I am sorry to grumble but it takes time to fix all of this. Yes the autonym is available because there is another subspecies - Pomaderris phylicifolia subsp. ericoides (Maiden & Betche) N.G.Walsh & Coates endemic to Australia - see https://biodiversity.org.au/nsl/services/search?product=APNI&tree.id=&name=Pomaderris+phylicifolia+subsp.+ericoides+%28Maiden+%26+Betche%29+N.G.Walsh+%26+Coates&inc._scientific=&inc.scientific=on&inc._cultivar=&inc._other=&max=100&display=apni&search=true. There are also other infraspecific taxa recognised at the rank of variety - not all of them are synonyms either
Please can you reverse this? Or I will have to do it
Ahh, I see - in the NZ source I relied on, an Australian subspecies was mentioned, but perhaps I mixed it up with ericifolia (or they mixed it up?)
https://vicflora.rbg.vic.gov.au/flora/taxon/7fa0853d-d191-44ba-b77a-1a01353ca3dc
mentions ssp. phylicifolia also for Australia.
If it helps the taxonomy of Pomaderris phylicifolia has been much confused. I haven't got the paper to hand right now but from memory P. phylicifolia var. ericifolia was synonymized by Neville Walsh into P. phylicifolia - see http://www.nzpcn.org.nz/flora_details.aspx?ID=90. The plant that had been confused with var. ericifolia in New Zealand is P. amoena Colenso (see http://www.nzpcn.org.nz/flora_details.aspx?ID=1184 - sory that I have not yet fully populated that 'fact sheet'), the current Australian treatment of the P. phylicifolia accepts two subspecies - subsp. phylicifolia (which we have in New Zealand and which is shared with Australia) and subsp. ericoides (which is endemic to Australia)
This treatment (from Flora of Victoria) is what I follow - https://vicflora.rbg.vic.gov.au/flora/search?q=Pomaderris%2A&rows=50&start=0
I observed, that the taxon swap I intended did not effectuate (I repeated, but subspecies status, and name did not leave system).
Was a mystery, why - but I think I know now:
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/17207
You swapped the basic binomen into the subspecies two years ago, Peter. That was as wrong as what I have done yesterday.
Proper action would be to move the observations to ssp. phylicifolia one by one.
Not 100% sure what you mean here by 'basic binomen into the subspecies' - do you mean I put the parent taxon into the subspecies? If so yes that was wrong - I was then (and indeed I still am) learning how to 'correct' / curate on iNaturalist such matters - I assume then the course of action would be to:
Create (if one doesn't exist) a P. phylicifolia subsp. ericoides
Systematically shift all the P. phylicifolia (New Zealand ones anyway I am not touching the Australian ones) to subsp. phylicifolia
I assume you still need to keep the parent taxon P. phylicifolia - in case people ate unclear what subspecies tehy have (only an issue in Australia and in cultivated plants - outside New Zealand).
I will look into this - but not right now - so if you wish to do this all instead - go right ahead.
Both https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/366718-Pomaderris-phylicifolia and https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/413079-Pomaderris-phylicifolia-phylicifolia
and look usual in edit mode, but when trying to save that, it says: "ERROR - Pomaderris phylicifolia phylicifolia rank level must be coarser than children"
??? the subspecies has no children . . .
@loarie - what's going on?
In ID field, in the parent taxon, and its two children (also ssp. ericoides, freshly installed) you can read:
[missing "en.ranks.Subspecies" translation]
but ID attaches.
Yes I saw that - no idea whatsoever
Let's wait for advice.
It may be that we can cure the case only by:
erecting new formal taxa;
IDing all observations to them;
(only 4, not much work)
deactivate the old formal taxa then.
I have never done a taxon split in iNat - maybe that helps as well?
"do you mean I put the parent taxon into the subspecies? "
yes, that was meant.
That rank level error is from one of the new validations discussed here https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/18768-new-validations-fyi-curators
Looks like it was caused by an inactive ssp descending from the ssp
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/413787-Pomaderris-phylicifolia-phylicifolia-phylicifolia
I deleted it for now so it won't hold you up. But will change the validation so it doesn't mind children that aren't finer rank level than the parent if the children are inactive
@pjd1 -can you confirm for me that Pomaderris phylicifolia phylicifolia is now Pomaderris phylicifolia? :)