Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SD via TW: test report #248

Open
yroskov opened this issue Feb 13, 2024 · 10 comments
Open

SD via TW: test report #248

yroskov opened this issue Feb 13, 2024 · 10 comments

Comments

@yroskov
Copy link

yroskov commented Feb 13, 2024

Systema Dipterorum ver. 5.0, 2024-01-08 processed via TW by DD; imported 2024-02-07

  • Imported: 177,193 spp (vs 171,937 spp in 4.2.2, May 2023)

Summary of issues for @proceps extracted from the editorial report #127 (comment)

@yroskov
Copy link
Author

yroskov commented Feb 13, 2024

  • Extinct flag is missing with species (0 spp now vs 3,792 in May 2023). (It is present with taxa of other ranks).
    Field Epoch in the source spreadsheet should be used for flagging extinct species.

@yroskov
Copy link
Author

yroskov commented Feb 13, 2024

  • Duplicated species. It might be a glitch in the original data (most possible. Confirmed!), or result of the import in TW

There are two reports with lists of duplicated species:

ACC-ACC species (same authors), 342: https://www.checklistbank.org/dataset/1101/duplicates?authorshipDifferent=false&category=binomial&limit=50&minSize=2&mode=STRICT&offset=0&status=accepted

There are 342 pairs of identical accepted species. For example:

Agadasys hexablepharis Whittington, 2000
Amblypsilopus qinlingensis Yang & Saigusa, 2005
Amplisegmentum venezuelensis Winterton, 2021
etc.

ACC-ACC species (different authors), 512: https://www.checklistbank.org/dataset/1101/duplicates?authorshipDifferent=true&category=binomial&limit=50&minSize=2&mode=STRICT&offset=0&status=accepted

There are many pairs of identical species which differ by bracketed and unbracketed authorstrings. For example:

Hoplacephala excisa (Villeneuve, 1913)
vs
Hoplacephala excisa Villeneuve, 1913
see http://www.diptera.org/Nomenclator?op_name=&Name=Hoplacephala+excisa&op_author=&Author=&op_year=&Year=&op_family=&Family=&op_validname=&ValidName=&kind=&Sortfield=unsorted&sortorder=ascending&max=10&find=Start+Search

Hoplacephala nigriventris (Villeneuve, 1913)
vs
Hoplacephala nigriventris Villeneuve, 1913
see http://www.diptera.org/Nomenclator?op_name=&Name=Hoplacephala+nigriventris&op_author=&Author=&op_year=&Year=&op_family=&Family=&op_validname=&ValidName=&kind=&Sortfield=unsorted&sortorder=ascending&max=10&find=Start+Search

Hoplacephala retroseta (Villeneuve, 1913)
vs
Hoplacephala retroseta Villeneuve, 1913
see http://www.diptera.org/Nomenclator?op_name=&Name=Hoplacephala+retroseta&op_author=&Author=&op_year=&Year=&op_family=&Family=&op_validname=&ValidName=&kind=&Sortfield=unsorted&sortorder=ascending&max=10&find=Start+Search

Huttonobesseria verecunda (Hutton, 1901)
vs
Huttonobesseria verecunda Hutton, 1901

Hystricia cuestae (Engel, 1920)
vs
Hystricia cuestae Engel, 1920

Isomyia pseudolucilia (Malloch, 1928)
vs
Isomyia pseudolucilia Malloch, 1928
etc.

Plus, there are 10 pairs of identical accepted species in this report. Full list (differently spelled authors!):

Empis (Polyblepharis) fedtschenkoi Shasmshev, 2023 = Shamshev vs Shasmshev
Empis (Polyblepharis) hirsutitarsis Shamshev, 2023
Empis (Polyblepharis) sogdiensis Shamshev, 2023
Empis (Polyblepharis) sogdiensis Shasmshev, 2023

Holops anarayae Barahona-Segovia, 2021 = Baharona-Segovia vs Barahona-Segovia
Holops grezi Barahona-Segovia, 2021
Holops pullomen Baharona-Segovia, 2021
Physoconops tentenvilu Baharona-Segovia, 2020

Paraclius brooksi Soares, Capellari & Ale-Rocha, 2023 = Soares, Capellari & Ale-Rocha, 2023: 176 vs Soares, Runyon & Capellari, 2023: 166

Polleniopsis bomdilaensis Bharti & Verves, 2016 = Bharti & Verves, 2015: 1 vs Bharti & Verves, 2016: 1

@yroskov
Copy link
Author

yroskov commented Feb 13, 2024

@yroskov
Copy link
Author

yroskov commented Feb 13, 2024

@gdower, there is an idea why this happened. TW exported a name as a string Sargus infuscatus var. [sic] minor (i.e. with added portion [sic]). Parser recognize it as a quadrinomial and CLB, probably, cut off third epithet.

@yroskov
Copy link
Author

yroskov commented Feb 13, 2024

  • Inconsistent Name, 840: incomplete trinomial names like Aedes subsp. holocinctus Edwards, 1941, Aedes var. var.hebrideus Edwards, 1926 and Amiota f. furcata Okada, 1960 (all synonyms). There are also names with var. var. portion. = "var. var. names" most possibly caused by TW exporter

https://www.checklistbank.org/dataset/1101/names?facet=rank&facet=issue&facet=status&facet=nomStatus&facet=nameType&facet=field&facet=authorship&facet=authorshipYear&facet=extinct&facet=environment&facet=origin&issue=inconsistent%20name&limit=50&offset=0

@gdower, in the case of "var. var. names" probably is also a cut of quadrinomial: if TW exported a name as a string Aedes variegatus var. var. hebrideus (i.e. with added portion var.). Somewhere (in parser or in CLB) the quadrinomial is shortened.

@yroskov
Copy link
Author

yroskov commented Feb 13, 2024

@proceps
Copy link

proceps commented Feb 13, 2024

Unparsable authorship, those probably have strange characters in the original DB:
Megaselia neocorynurae Gonz�ález, Brown & Ospina, 2002

@proceps
Copy link

proceps commented Feb 13, 2024

Unusual Name Characters, 28: incomplete trinomial names like Sargus infuscatus var. -- This looks like the parser error. The name is complete in TW.

@proceps
Copy link

proceps commented Feb 13, 2024

Inconsistent Name, 840: incomplete trinomial names like Aedes subsp. holocinctus Edwards, 1941 --- Incomplete data in the original DB.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants