Topic: Irregularity in dictionary 4S re: WCA9 statuses

Hi all,

I think I've come across a discrepancy that seems to have come about with our latest dictionary upgrade (4S). A number of species that were expected in our reporting on WCA9 species records were absent, including Himalayan Balsam.

I've attached a screenshot of how Himalayan Balsam appears in R6 - note the 'This taxon has no designations' as shown in the Extra Info window and the inclusion on the WCA9 checklist in the sidebar. I also double-checked this by looking for the Recommended Taxon List Item Key in the TAXON_DESIGNATIONS table (returned no rows), and running the Sy05 - Taxon Designations Available for Sets report which returns 64 items for WCA9i and 9ii, rather fewer than the number of items on the WCA9 list when viewed in the Taxon Dictionary Browser. I'm not aware of any revision to the WCA9 list that would have removed such species as Himalayan Balsam, Rhododendron ponticum or Giant Knotweed.

R6 version:
If relevant, I did run the check on the number of items as recommended after a dictionary upgrade, and the figures matched with the expected numbers provided by Mike.


Post's attachments

Impatiens glandulifera R6.jpg 264.51 kb, file has never been downloaded. 

You don't have the permssions to download the attachments of this post.


Re: Irregularity in dictionary 4S re: WCA9 statuses

From my investigations it looks like R6 is in line with the UKSI. I have checked against the Master UKSI database and none of the TLIK's for  Himalayan Balsam appear in the Taxon Designation Table.

I am not sure how you were getting the WCA9 designations before 4S and it may be that something has affected this process rather than something in the dictionary.

Mike Weideli
Littlefield Consultancy - IT Consultants