1 Reply by ser

  • ser
  • ser
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Staffordshire Ecological Recor
  • Registered: 24-09-2008
  • Posts: 603

Re: Common name problems

Don't know if this should be here or under Species Dictionary, but here goes!

I've long noticed a problem in reports because there is no 'preferred common name' I keep getting lists with the same scientific name but different common names - this looks a bit silly and confusing when sending reports out - a minor annoyance

I have now, however, found a few 'errors' in the species dictionary which are a little more dangerous, so be wary when entering records by English name - I've only checked vascular plants, so I don't know if these affect other taxa:

1) We have all complained about the loss of the "a species" common names e.g. 'a grass' for taxa without a recognised common name - I have discovered that in many cases these taxa now have no common name (that is fine and the way it should be), but in some cases 'a species' has changed to 'Species' - this can cause a problem if there is already a taxon with common name 'Species' as it is easy to enter an obscure species instead of the common one - Bramble is one example in data entry you can get the following results:
1a) Bramble off the Preferred Checklists does not even return Rubus fruticosus, only 4 moths and a shark!
1b) Bramble off the Recorder 3.3 or Unrestricted lists give every micro-species of Rubus with no indication which is the common one - would take a non-biologist ages to find the right one!
1c) Bramble off the VASCULAR PLANTS list gives no matches although *bramble gives 5 other species but not R.fruticosus even though Bramble is given as the common name in the Taxon dictionary!

Other examples of this change of a vague name into a specific one include 'a lady's mantle', 'a yarrow' and 'a bitter-cress' (not a comprehensive list by any means)

2) some common names are anything but:
2a) the common name of Montbretia is 'Crocosmia' while the common name of Crocosmia is 'Montbretia'
2b) many report their scientific name as the common name - this is the usual result if there is no common name - I would prefer either NO common name or a return to the "a species" format
2c) some species report a different scientific name - usually (hopefully always) a synonym e.g. Dactylorchis maculata subsp. ericetorum has the common name of 'Dactylorhiza maculata subsp. ericetorum'

I am compiling a spreadsheet of all these inconsistencies which I will send in due course to Recorder support and the Natural History Museum to get at least some inconsistencies sorted out!

Rant over, Craig

Craig Slawson
Staffordshire Ecological Record

ser's Website

2 Reply by MikeWeideli

  • MikeWeideli
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Littlefield Consultancy
  • Registered: 05-07-2006
  • Posts: 2,645

Re: Common name problems

There are a number of issues involved here.

For reporting with the Wizard if you are using the Recommended Scientific Name then you can use the Recommended_Common_name which goes with it.  Recommended Common Name has been one of the options since 6.15. This should  at least avoid the situation where you get different common names for the same scientific name.

The problem you describe with the Brambles, which no doubt applies to other taxa is that in the  Taxon Dictionary Browser and elsewhere the Common Name is coming from the Taxon_Common_Name table and not from the list you are browsing. However, when you do a search  on a specified list the search is based only on common names from that list. This works in the same way as synonyms . As Bramble doesn't appear in the Vascular plants list it isn't being found during the search.

For the same reason a search on the preferred for Bramble  doesn't return Rubus fruticosusm, because Bramble isn't used in the preferred list for Vascular Plants.

Most of the problems  can be traced to the way the table Taxon_Common_name is populated. This has just one common name for each Taxon_List_Item_Key, but it is populated based  on the Taxon_Version_Key. This table is populated by a mainly automated routine at JNCC and derives the common name by choosing one from those available options in a rather arbitary way. This gives rise to a number of inconsistencies which are discussed in my documentation covered in topic
http://forums.nbn.org.uk/viewtopic.php?id=2386

As you will see from the topic I attempted to come up with a better way of allocating the common names. The approach I used did eliminate many of the anomalies and gave much more consistent results, but unfortunately it also changed some things in a way which was not acceptable. The main problem being that there are some instances where, even with the same list, a taxon can have mutiple common names.

In these situations the automated approach has to make some arbitary decision about the one to use. It didn't look as though any progress would be possible without an additional table which enabled some control over the choice in these situations.  I am now more hopeful that  it might be possible to include such a table with the  changes in Dictionary processing which we will be starting work on shortly.

Also we might to need to look at the way searches on Common Name works. We would appreciate any thoughts on the requirements.

Mike Weideli

MikeWeideli's Website

3 Reply by ser

  • ser
  • ser
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Staffordshire Ecological Recor
  • Registered: 24-09-2008
  • Posts: 603

Re: Common name problems

Hi Mike,

Thanks for pointing out the "Recommended Common Name" - I'd missed its addition to the Reports - I'll try using it from now on

Cheers

Craig

Craig Slawson
Staffordshire Ecological Record

ser's Website