1 Reply by jtaylor

  • jtaylor
  • New member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 26-04-2007
  • Posts: 1

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 However I am presently faced with a large volume of plant records, many of them recorded under out-of-date scientific names, for which I would have to use an older dictionary.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

2 Reply by charlesroper

  • charlesroper
  • charlesroper
  • Digital Development Manager
  • Offline
  • From: Field Studies Council
  • Registered: 26-03-2006
  • Posts: 906

Re: Changes to scientific names and using the preferred dictionaries

Hi Joe,

While it used to be the case that records stored through a number of dictionaries caused problems with data searches, this is no longer the case thanks to a technology built into Recorder known as the Nameserver. I'm not sure when it was introduced in Recorder 2002, but I do know it is in all versions of 6. The Nameserver transparently links names, old and new, including synonyms, across dictionaries provided that someone, i.e., John Tweddle, has made those links. Generally, the links seem to be pretty good.

So, for example, if you search for the red-veined darter using any one of its three latin spellings: Sympetrum fonscolombeii, Sympetrum fonscolombei or Sympetrum fonscolombii you will still get all of the records back for this species complete with the name they were recorded against. Another example would be Anacamptis pyramidalis and Orchis pyramidalis: try entering some records against either name, using various checklists, then try reporting on them - you should get all records back.

Charles

Charles Roper
Digital Development Manager | Field Studies Council
http://www.field-studies-council.org | https://twitter.com/charlesroper | https://twitter.com/fsc_digital

charlesroper's Website

3 Reply by johnt

  • johnt
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 07-06-2006
  • Posts: 32

Re: Changes to scientific names and using the preferred dictionaries

I'd just like to add to Charles' comments by saying that if you spot something that doesn't look right or a synonym that we have missed, then please let us know (either via this forum or directly to speciesdictionary@nhm.ac.uk).

We are endeavouring to include all synonyms that are in UK use, but there are still gaps for some taxonomic groups - species splitting can be particularly difficult to detect! Hence, any comments or advice that help to improve the utility of the Species Dictionary will be greatfully received.

Many thanks,
John