1 Reply by burkmarr

  • burkmarr
  • burkmarr
  • FSC BioLinks Digital Development Officer
  • Offline
  • From: Preston Montford
  • Registered: 14-05-2006
  • Posts: 105

Re: Incorrect reporting of Hybrid Bluebell

When I run reports to extract records of legally protected taxa, Hybrid Bluebell is included in the results. If I run the report 'System Report>Information>Find designations for <taxon>' against Hybrid Bluebell (Hyacinthoides hispanica x non-scripta) it is reported as being on schedule 8 of WACA. It's not listed in the JNCC designation spreadsheet against that schedule. Can anyone confirm that this is an error in the taxon dictionary?

Richard Burkmar
Biodiversity Project Officer
Field Studies Council

burkmarr's Website

2 Reply by burkmarr

  • burkmarr
  • burkmarr
  • FSC BioLinks Digital Development Officer
  • Offline
  • From: Preston Montford
  • Registered: 14-05-2006
  • Posts: 105

Re: Incorrect reporting of Hybrid Bluebell

It seems as though Recorder may have assigned the hybrid to the designation because it is a child of Bluebell in at least one list in the taxon dictionary (Recorder 3.3). See also here: http://forums.nbn.org.uk/viewtopic.php?pid=7225.

Richard Burkmar
Biodiversity Project Officer
Field Studies Council

burkmarr's Website

3 Reply by MikeWeideli

  • MikeWeideli
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Littlefield Consultancy
  • Registered: 05-07-2006
  • Posts: 2,627

Re: Incorrect reporting of Hybrid Bluebell

This will be the case. The JNCC collation list is mainly at species level and the query which populates Index_Taxon_Designation goes down the hierarchy on all lists to pick up anything below the level in the JNCC Collation list.  My understanding is that normally sub-species should  be included, but wonder if this is true  of the hybrids ?  If  hybrids were excluded from the hierarchy when generating Index_Taxon_Designation would this solve the problem or just create new ones ? 
. 

Mike

Mike Weideli

MikeWeideli's Website