|
The technical forum of the NBN Trust for use by the Network. It includes discussions and announcements on the NBN Atlas, Recorder 6 and Indicia |
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Forum → UK Species Inventory / Dictionary → Highly designated ferrets (trying again)
I posted a detailed note on this a couple of hours ago, but it seems to have been deleted.
Without posting the whole story again, export of ferret
Mustela furo Linnaeus, 1758, NBNSYS000000513
from R6 links with the designations for Polecat
Mustela putorius Linnaeus, 1758 [Polecat], NBNSYS0000005129.
I had a load of other detail which I am not prepared to post again, but there seems to be something wrong somewhere.
Murdo
Hi Murdo, I'm sure we had this one ages ago didn't we and we double-checked and sorted out the synonymy? Could this be a legacy of that or a Recorder problem somewhere down the line? The current taxa look to be correctly set up here in the UKSI. If the data does need tweaking then if someone can let me know where then I'd be happy to do it :)
The recommended taxon name for Mustela furo is Mustela putorius subsp. furo on the list of additional names - is this 'correct'? This appears to be where the designations are coming from (that is, the parent taxon).
I wondered about that too - I was surprised to see it as the subspecies.
Although the taxa may be set up correctly (as Chris says), the links to the appropriate designations seem not to be. I am puzzled, though, that although subsp. furo exists, there is no other subspecies in M. putorius. Surely there should be a nominate subspecies? And if so, different designations should be applied to each, as in e.g. the nominate and island races of Wren.
M.
Edit - a bit of help from Wikipedia, and I see that the nominate ssp. is on mainland Europe, and that angliae and caledoniae are the UK races. So presumably these last two should be in UKSI with appropriate designations.
From what I can see R6 is reflecting the NHM Dictionary. Mustela furo (TVK NBNSYS0000005130) points to Recommended TVK NHMSYS0020774295 (Mustela putorius subsp. furo) which is used on just the List of Additional Names and the SNH List of Gaelic Names. The taxon designations are for Mustela putorius, so by definition all sub species of this will get the same designation as their parent.
I thought there was some discussions on how to 'stop' this - but think that was actually in reference to hybrids (the hybrids were put under the genus as opposed to species) not subspecies ?
You are right, Mike, but the results are clearly inappropriate. To take the example of Wren,
Troglodytes troglodytes (Linnaeus, 1758) [Wren], NHMSYS0000530671 is Bern Convention Appendix 2;
Troglodytes troglodytes subsp. troglodytes (Linnaeus, 1758), NHMSYS0020303231 has no designations (should that not be Bern too?);
Troglodytes troglodytes subsp. hirtensis Seebohm, 1884 [St Kilda Wren], NHMSYS0001596570 is Bird Population Status - red; UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species; Scottish Biodiversity List;
Troglodytes troglodytes subsp. zetlandicus E. Hartert, 1910 [Shetland Wren], NHMSYS0020303232 has no designations (should that not be Bern too?);
Troglodytes troglodytes subsp. fridariensis on the Gateway gives a Server Error page if you try to access https://data.nbn.org.uk/Taxa/NHMSYS0001596569 (so that is another problem for someone else to solve), but G4 gives it as Birds Directive Annex 1; Bird Population Status - red; UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority species; Scottish Biodiversity List.
The system clearly allows a species to have different designations from its contained races, and for different races to have different designations. It is mad to have R6 reports saying that someone's escaped Ferret is designated Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 for E&W, UK Biodiversity Action Plan; The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 2010 (Schedule 4); Habitats Directive Annex 5; Bern Convention Appendix 3. So a solution that makes sense in the real world is needed.
Murdo
It is the generation of Index_Taxon_designation which is expanding the species so that designation for sub species get the same designation as their parents. It looks to me as though this is showing the sub species of Troglodytes troglodytes as Bern Convention Appendix 2 , which I would expect.
I thought including the sub species was the correct thing to do in most situations. If there are instances like this one where this doesn't make sense then currently I can't see a way of making the distinction.
Davison et al 1999 - http://www.vwt.org.uk/docs/polecat/hybr … -et-al.pdf - for Balharry see http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/jncc154.pdf p23:
Balharry et al. (1994) suggest that polecats and even polecat/domestic ferret hybrids (as M. putorius rather thanM. furoorM. eversmannii) may receive some pro-tection under Schedule 6 of the British Wildlife andCountryside Act (HMSO, 1981). Unfortunately, whilstthis may be true mitochondrial DNA is not suÅcientlydiscriminatory to establish whether an individual ani-mal is a ferret, hybrid or polecat. Again, further studieswith microsatellites are required. Although the circum-stances of hybridization are di?erent, Scottish wildcats (Felis silvestris) and feral cat/wildcat hybrids are cur-rently unprotected under Scottish law.
Anyway, the MAMMALS list has Mustela furo as a species distinct from Mustela putorius. The list of additional names has form furo and subsp. furo with the parent organism as putorius. If (and I'm thinking out loud here) form furo and subsp. furo were assigned as synonyms of Mustela furo would this solve the 'problem' or would the fact their parent organism being Mustela putorius still bring in the designation?
Forum → UK Species Inventory / Dictionary → Highly designated ferrets (trying again)
Powered by PunBB 1.4.6, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.