1 Topic by HBRG Data Manager

  • HBRG Data Manager
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • Registered: 03-06-2016
  • Posts: 66

Topic: Alder gall-mite names

Hello Chris.

An email this evening set me off chasing an apparent anomaly with Alder leaf mite galls.

I have always used Eriophyes inangulis for the axillary gall (ex axillare), but I gather that the name to use now is Aceria nalepai.

NBNG at present has these as different taxa, https://data.nbn.org.uk/Taxa/NHMSYS0020190423 and https://data.nbn.org.uk/Taxa/NHMSYS0020190548, neither showing the other as a synonym.

R6 gives this:

TAXON.ITEM_NAME    Taxon key    TVK    TLIK
Aceria nalepai    NHMSYS0020190050    NHMSYS0020190423    NHMSYS0020189674
Eriophyes inangulis    NHMSYS0020190175    NHMSYS0020190548    NHMSYS0020189799

The advice I have just been given is that these should be synonymised as per the latest Shirley & Redfern.

If so, something needs adjusting in UKSI.

Murdo

2 Reply by ChrisR

  • ChrisR
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • Registered: 27-08-2011
  • Posts: 1,131

Re: Alder gall-mite names

Great - that's done now :)

Chris Raper, Manager of the UK Species Inventory, Angela Marmont Centre for UK Biodiversity,
Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD.  (tel: 020 7942 5894)
also Tachinid Recording Scheme (http://tachinidae.org.uk/)

3 Reply by HBRG Data Manager

  • HBRG Data Manager
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • Registered: 03-06-2016
  • Posts: 66

Re: Alder gall-mite names

Thanks, Chris.  And for the Polistes thing.

M.

4 Reply by charliebarnes

  • charliebarnes
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Greater Lincolnshire
  • Registered: 07-09-2008
  • Posts: 1,396

Re: Alder gall-mite names

I'm assuming this synonymy is no longer considered current, based on recent changes in the UKSI, but I think these changes might be causing us some issues. The raw name "Eriophyes inangulis" is currently a synonym of "Aceria nalepai (Fockeu, 1890) (mites examined)". This feels wrong - and a bit of a over assumption.

Given the issues surrounding identification/understanding (one or the other may be an inquiline?), would it make more sense to have an aggregate taxon "Aceria nalepai/Eriophyes inangulis (gall)" with the raw names "Eriophyes inangulis Nalepa, 1919" and "Aceria nalepai (Fockeu, 1890)" as synonyms of this, and then distinct entries for where the mites have been examined i.e. "Aceria nalepai (Fockeu, 1890) (mites examined)" (which we have already) and "Eriophyes inangulis Nalepa, 1919 (mites examined)".

All existing names for both to be synonymized under the aggregate, ie leaving it to data providers to manually tranfer records where mites have been examined and identification nailed down?

(I'm ignoring Eriophyes axillaris for the purposes of this!)

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

charliebarnes's Website