1

Re: White/Pied Wagtails

Hi

I have now found that there is a problem in R6 (6.9.3.102) in the way it treats this species (two subspecies). Earlier, I had requested that there be separate entries for Pied Wagtail (Motacilla alba yarrellii) the subspecies that is most common and breeds in the UK, especially locally for me in north-east Wales, and for White Wagtail (Motacilla alba alba) which is a migrant in the UK and north-east Wales.

The species name in the BOU checklist 2006 is White Wagtail (correct) but in R6 it is listed as 'Pied Wagtail' (incorrect). I have been importing two sets of data (mixed with many other records) and I have marked them as White Wagtail in the species name, with yarrellii or alba in the comments column of the import wizard. It seems that R6 takes any wagtail listed in the import wizard as 'White Wagtail' and calls it 'Pied Wagtail' - totally incorrect of course!. I now wish to repair these problems but I cannot as there is no listing for White Wagtail.

Also, can anyone tell me what the name for the import wizard 'Comments' in the report wizard? A field that is listed as 'Sample Comment' does not contain the data I wish.

Is there any chance of sorting out this dictionary problem in the near future? Can I add an entry in the dictionary to hold records for White Wagtail (alba alba) in the meantime?

I look forward to any useful suggestions! Thanks in anticipation,

Cheers, Ian

2

Re: White/Pied Wagtails

Ian,

I'll try to fix this for the next update - which will be helped by the fact that we now have permission to include subspecies within the copy of the BOU list that we hold.

Can I check that I've understood you correctly:

"Pied Wagtail" should only be used for subsp. yarrellii
"White Wagtail" should only be used for subsp. alba
The only common name options that should be used for the full species are "White/Pied Wagtail" and "White or Pied Wagtail"

This is complicated slightly because the BOU list does not associate common names with the individual subspecies (the copy that I have just gives common names for full species), and because another list that we hold, the RSPB list, gives Pied Wagtail as the name for the full species. This just makes the nameserver that R6 uses more difficult to compile - I suspect that there is also a small glitch - can't explain your results otherwise!

If this still isn't fixed after the May/June update, please let me know,

John

John Tweddle
Data Manager, NBN Species Dictionary

3

Re: White/Pied Wagtails

Hi John

What you wrote under "Can I check..." is correct and would be perfect.

The common name options are as you stated also.

I look forward to having this dictionary upgrade, then I shall work through the records that I have to record them correctly.  I hope the upgrade won't be another five hour job, but I shall wait optimistically. Many thanks for the good news.

Cheers, Ian

4

Re: White/Pied Wagtails

Ian, theoretically the next dictionary update won't take nearly as long because it should contain far fewer updates and additions. Having said that, it's getting on a bit since the last update and thus it could end up being quite a big one. We'll see.

Charles

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

5

Re: White/Pied Wagtails

Hi Sarah

Please see the messages above - to me it sounded as if John Tweddle was happy that the necessary permissions for subspecies had been obtained.

Is a small dictionary upgrade with what I need likely in the near future?

Cheers, Ian

6

Re: White/Pied Wagtails

Hi

Just a final note to this thread. The subspecies have been implemented and with the import I type, eg for Pied Wagtail, 'Motacilla alba yarrellii' and at the check of species name, the first time I had to match it manually, as within R6 it is listed as 'Motacilla alba subsp yarrellii'. Thereafter the manual match has not had to be made - I am impressed that R6 remembers this.

Rather later than it has been implemented I thank those who made this facility available (I needed to check it to believe it first!).

All the best, Ian