Topic: Too many Gyrinus natator records

I'm not sure if this is the best area of the forum for this post. It isn't really a species dictionary fault.

The whirligig Gyrinus natator is famously rare in GB, only two confirmed records from Cumbria in the early 20th century as far as I know, though it is more widespread in Ireland. Unfortunately, the commonest GB whirligig, Gyrinus substriatus, was long considered a subspecies of natator, up to about 1983, so there are many natator records out there which ought to be substriatus and many of them are on the NBN. How does this get solved? Does it need each data provider to alter their own data and resubmit?

Some of the datasets supplying G. natator records to the NBN are surprising. NE Scotland Fungus Records is perhaps explainable if the Gyrinus was recorded as the host of Laboulbenia sp. It is harder to guess how so many Gyrinus records are in the RECORD Coccinellidae dataset.

John Bratton


Re: Too many Gyrinus natator records

I assume "Coccinellidae" is a typo for "Coleoptera" - there are lots of other families represented and the other RECORD datasets are all at order level or similar. There are ~40 beetle records in the Scotland Fungus Records - I would also guess at hosts of Laboulbenia as well, although this isn't in the record data.

I think where this type of situation has occurred before, it has to be up to each data provider to correct & resubmit (or at least give the okay for the NBN to make the change behind the scenes).

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership


Re: Too many Gyrinus natator records

Hi John, this is an extraction issue, the entire RECORD Coleoptera dataset has been extracted instead of just the Coccinellidae. As you may have gathered the wider Coleoptera data hasn't, as yet, been verified and should not have been uploaded. We are in the process of re-extracting the Coccinelidae dataset for upload and asked that the existing upload be taken down.


Eric Fletcher
RECORD Manager