Re: Changes to scientific names and using the preferred dictionaries
This is a quick note to ask what people do when faced with species recorded under a different scientific name than that given in the preferred dictionary.
With taxa that I am familiar with such as birds and mammals I can deduce whether a name change is significant, ie. whether a species has been split or lumped. However I am presently faced with a large volume of plant records, many of them recorded under out-of-date scientific names, for which I would have to use an older dictionary. I have been told that records should always be stored under the name they were originally recorded under - whatever the reason for the name change. However, as you know, having records stored through a number of dictionaries can complicate data searches.
Please let me know if and how you get around this problem.
Many thanks,
Joe