For the ones I have checked it does look like the old names (taxon list_item_keys) have become synonyms of the new names. NameServer seesm to relect this, so the Gateway will be Ok as it doesn't use Taxon_List_Item_Keys.  Also if you report on the new name you will get all the old names as well providing Option 'Tranlate to full term' is set to true in Tools/Options.  Most users will not be affected, because, they will have this option set to true.

However, I am not sure the dictionary is correct in that  I think that although NameServer is dealing with these taxa as synonyms, they are not being treated as synonyms within the British Isles List of Lichens and Lichenicolous Fungi. I think they were set up as synonyms with the list, than they would appear even with the 'Translate' to full term option turned off.  Chris needs to look at this before you start changing keys. However, if it is necessary, I think it should  be possible to identify all the cases and make the change with a few quries.

I wouldn't expect them to show up in the lists, because they are no longer valid taxa, just synonyms. What it would expect is that if you report on the new name you get  both old and new taxa. This isn't going to help you because you will get two lines for what is the same species. I would think you would be best redeterming the entries and I will help with this. Most general users will be reporting using the recommended name and will not be affected.

Hi everyone

I'm not sure whether this is perhaps an issue to do with the new checklist or just the way that Recorder reports on the records it holds? When we worked on the list I think everyone agreed that what we have in the checklist and in the wider database itself represented the correct taxonomy but is this issue a quirk with the standard Recorder reports? Would it have helped if we had included more of the old synonyms in the new checklist?

As always I'm happy to help, if I can. :)

Best wishes,
Chris R.

I think I undertsand why Janet has a  problem.  I think Janet has just been using just the Lichen list  and the preferred name for reporting, however, this doesn't work once the synonyms aren't represented in the list.  Janet has avoided the use of recommended names derived from nameserver, because up to now these have come from the Fungi list. Among other things this would mean the sort orders would be derived from the  Fungi list and not from the Lichen Society list. Changing the Lichen list to a preferred list and giving it priority over the Fungi list for the Lichen will partly solve the problem, but it would mean Janet changing her reporting to use the recommended names instead of the preferred names.   Taking everything into consideration I would think that redetermining the taxa would be the best solution. I will do what I can to help with this.

I have been looking into this some more and can confirm that the old data is being picked up correctly as a synonym for the new name for many taxa, but not for all. The problems are mostly to do with species aggregates, sensu latos and sensu strictos, none of which are picking up their synonyms correctly. There seem to be a few other oddities as well but I'll report back on them when I get to the end of the list. It's a long list so that will take a while.

When we redetermine these can we do it by adding a new determination rather than amending the existing one, so that we have a dated audit trail?

Janet