1

Re: XML report - JNCC_L2_Location

I'm not sure if this should be posted here or in the Species Dictionary section, anyway here goes - the XML report - JNCC_L2_Location is producing some rather interesting results on my copy of Recorder 6.13, for example:

Recommended Name    Designations (short names)
Buellia griseovirens      RedList_GB_post2001:DD; Status:NR (incl RedListed)
Ramalina farinacea      Nationally scarce

Neither of the above lichens should have any form of interesting status attached to them as published in ‘A Conservation Evaluation of British Lichens’ by R.G. Woods & B.J.Coppins BLS 2003.

The XML report uses a function called LCFormatTaxonDesKind6 to concatenate any designations found on the Recorder 6 version of the JNCC Taxon_designations_20080415.xls in to a single field.  In an attempt to find out why odd results were produced, I extracted the SELECT part of the function and included the actual name from Index_Taxon_Name table in the SQL output-

SELECT     tdt.SHORT_NAME, itn.ACTUAL_NAME, itn.PREFERRED_NAME
FROM         INDEX_TAXON_SYNONYM AS its INNER JOIN
                      INDEX_TAXON_GROUP AS itg ON its.SYNONYM_LIST_ITEM_KEY = itg.CONTAINED_LIST_ITEM_KEY INNER JOIN
                      INDEX_TAXON_NAME AS itn ON itn.TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY = itg.TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY INNER JOIN
                      INDEX_TAXON_NAME AS itn2 ON itn2.RECOMMENDED_TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY = itn.RECOMMENDED_TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY INNER JOIN
                      TAXON_DESIGNATION AS TD ON TD.TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY = itn2.TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY INNER JOIN
                      TAXON_DESIGNATION_TYPE AS tdt ON TD.TAXON_DESIGNATION_TYPE_KEY = tdt.TAXON_DESIGNATION_TYPE_KEY INNER JOIN
                      TAXON_LIST_ITEM AS TLI ON TLI.TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY = TD.TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY INNER JOIN
                      TAXON_LIST_VERSION AS TLV ON TLV.TAXON_LIST_VERSION_KEY = TLI.TAXON_LIST_VERSION_KEY
WHERE     (its.TAXON_LIST_ITEM_KEY = 'NHMSYS0000357556')
GROUP BY tdt.SHORT_NAME, itn.ACTUAL_NAME, itn.PREFERRED_NAME

SHORT_NAME                            ACTUAL_NAME                           PREFERRED_NAME
Nationally scarce                       Ramalina pollinaria                     Ramalina farinacea
Nationally scarce                       Ramalina pollinaria var. humilis   Ramalina farinacea

RedList_GB_post2001:DD          Buellia arborea                           Buellia griseovirens
Status:NR (incl RedListed)         Buellia arborea                           Buellia griseovirens

According to the above mentioned BLS publication the statuses for the ‘Actual Name’ species are correct.  However, I don’t think they are valid synonyms for the taxa recorded from my site.  The BLS list of synonyms on the web site http://www.thebls.org.uk/content/synlist.html  doesn’t list B. arborea as a synonym for B. griseovirens.  The entry for R. pollinaria on the site indicates that there might have been a partial match for R. farinacea, but to flag every record of R. farinacea as nationally scarce would appear to be stretching things a bit.

I’ve run the XML report against some of the other sites on my database and it produced numerous lichens with no interesting status flagged up as nationally rare or scarce. Here are a few more examples - Caloplaca saxicola, Cladonia chlorophaea, Cladonia fimbriata, Calicium glaucellum.

Ian Carle
Biological Records Centre Manager
SBBRC

2

Re: XML report - JNCC_L2_Location

Hi Ian,

Are you using the British Isles List of Lichens and Lichenicolous Fungi? This is the list maintained by the BLS, and is the most up to date lichen list in Recorder. Last year we spent several weeks going through it to set up a reliable synonymy with the intention of stopping these problems.

Unfortunately, although we have raised this several times (most recently on this forum in March viewtopic.php?pid=2621#p2621) and been assured that it would be made the preferred list for lichens in a future release this has still not happened. As a result the correct name is often overridden by an incorrect preferred name and the taxon dictionary still shows synonyms that are known to be invalid. The problem with the conservation status presumably has the same cause. You can get round it to some extent by changing reports to use the actual rather than the preferred name, but that doesn't entirely solve the problem.

I really don't know what more the BLS can do about this, but perhaps if the powers that be see that it is not just us that is affected they will do something about it at last?

Janet

Janet Simkin
British Lichen Society

3

Re: XML report - JNCC_L2_Location

Hi Janet
I did check to see if the list used to enter the records made any difference and I got the same results if I used our BLS list as I did with the British Mycological Society list.  The good news is that it shows the function used to produce the report picks up species no matter which list they’ve been entered from, the bad news is that some of the synonyms are wrong.

It is a shame that the concerns you raised in your earlier posting have not been addressed as we a left with a report and function that should be extremely useful, but which produces incorrect results.

Ian
SBBRC