|
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 → Stuckenia pectinata
Since upgrading dictionary to 02M this name from the MARINE Species Checklist for Fennel Pondweed (normally Potamogeton pectinatus) has taken over as the Recommended Taxon name. Is this correct? surely the VASCULAR PLANTS list should be the preferred name?
The Kingdom Plantae in the MARINE checklist appears to be a very odd mixture with many taxa only represented at family or generic level. Has it been properly edited?
I have checked the R6 dictionary and it is correctly reflecting what is in the NHM Dictionary. Potamogeton pectinatus (TVK NBNSYS0000002146) has a Recommended Taxon Version key of NHMSYS0021060372 which points to Stuckenia pectinata, and the only list which this appears on is the new Marine list.
Can you tell if the Marine Checklist has become the recommended source for any other plant names? I really don't see why it is preferred for Vascular plant taxa
In the case of Potamogeton pectinatus and I suspect others it isn't that the Marine list has become preferred or taken any higher priority, but that the name has changed (ie Nameserver now points the name to a new name - Stuckenia pectinata ) and the only list on which the new names appears is the Marine list. If a name appears on both the Marine and Vascular plant list then the preferred name is still taken from the Vascular plants list. I can't comment on the validity of the name change which has driven this.
The online NHM checklist http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/ … natus.html still has Potamogeton pectinatus as the preferred name - is it out of sync with NBN?
I still don't understand why the genus Stuckenia, which doesn't appear to be recognised in any recent BSBI publications, has been adopted as the 'new' recommended name (it was published in 1912).
I have asked Chris to take a look. Recorder 6 is definitely reflecting the latest NHM list,
Hi everyone - I'm on holiday so I don't have access to my copy of Stace3, which is in the office.
The marine checklist would definitely be the source of the confusion as this was taken recently as an up to date interpretation of the taxonomy it contained - as on the WoRMS checklist. During the import I skipped lichens, birds and most insects because these had been updated very recently and I didn't trust WoRMS on those groups. Flowering plants was a tricky one because we haven't had a BSBI update for a while - something I am working with Tom Humphrey to remedy - so I would have used WoRMS (it only covers a very limited selection of taxa found near the sea anyway) and assumed that they were more up to date than what we have here. Obviously UK interpretations can be different so I expected that a few things might need adjusting but with a 22500 row checklist I had to make some sweeping assumptions, knowing that a few might be incorrect. Apologies if it has caused confusion.
The example of Stuckenia pectinata seems to show a difference between UK and European interpretations (or at least a difference in expert views) but I will investigate. Obviously the best fix would be a new BSBI checklist but in the absence of that I am always happy to adjust species manually to get people over any problems. :)
Best wishes,
Chris R.
OK, this has been fixed now - apologies for the confusion :)
This change will be implemented in Dictionary upgarde 2N,2O,2P,2Q,2R,2S. This will be available in the next few days.
Forum → UK Species Inventory / Dictionary → Stuckenia pectinata
Powered by PunBB 1.4.6, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.