TW dev (3i Agnesiella): test report

[yroskov]

Test of exporter from TaxonWorks.

Test report for the genus Agnesiella from 3i Auchenorrhyncha on prod: https://data.catalogue.life/dataset/2216/classification

Frontend version: 0c38db6 October 2, 2020 3:02 AMBackend version: 0dfc7dc October 1, 2020 10:17 PM

Dataset in TW Sandcatstle:

(Dataset in AC19: http://www.catalogueoflife.org/annual-checklist/2019/browse/tree/id/70177817bba1d68004b2b552e00c4959)

[yroskov]

Additional datasets: genus Agnesiella https://data.catalogue.life/dataset/2218/classification

[yroskov]

@gdower @proceps

[yroskov]

Agnesiella

• [ ] Missing species in export (TW dev vs ac19), 2: Agnesiella (Draberiella) angami Agnesiella (Draberiella) nagalandi

• [ ] Incorrectly assigned flag "chresonym" in synonyms

• [ ] One binomial is missing in synonymy to above species: Agnesiella aino In ac19:

[yroskov]

• [ ] Reference: missing field Title TW dev: Published in Matsumura. Insecta Matsumurana. 93-120;6;3;article (1932). ac19: Matsumura, S. 1932 [missing] A revision of the Palaearctic and Oriental Typhlocybid-genera with descriptions of new species and new genera. Insecta Matsumurana. 6(3): 93-120.

• [ ] Reference: mixed up order of volumes and pages "93-120;6;3" vs "6(3): 93-120"

[yroskov]

• [ ] Always missing protonym/basionym in synonymy. Example: Typhlocyba nitobella Matsumura, 1932, a basionym for Agnesiella (Agnesiella) nitobella (Matsumura, 1932) In ac19:

In TW dev:

• [ ] Flag "basionym" incorrectly assigned to the combination (see example above).

[yroskov]

Agnesiella has no missing species (+2 new vs ac19)

Example: Alnetoidia (Alnella) sudzuchenica

• [ ] Double brackets with subgenus: Alnetoidia ((Alnella)) sudzhuchenica [sic]

• [ ] What to do with comment [sic] in the name (often occur)? I prefer - delete during export.

• [ ] Name with missing epithet in synonymy

• [ ] also missing names among synonyms: Alnella (Alnella) sudzuchenica and Alnetoidia (Alnella) sudzhuchenica Sohi, 1998 compare with ac19:

[mdoering]

What to do with comment [sic] in the name (often occur)? I prefer - delete during export.

As the usual rule of thumb I strongly advocate to keep the data in exports as closely to its original form as possible. We should parse sic in the name parser and then COL can deal with it as it prefers.

Please indicate in the parser issue if it is an issue of high priority

[proceps]

A. nagalandi is not classified in Agnesiella, it is treated as incertae sedis. It should have a parent under Typhlocybinae now. Well, I am not sure how incertae sedis are treated in CoL now.

[proceps]

Agnesiella aino (Matsumura, 1932) is a subsequent combination and marked as a chrysonym. My understanding all combinations are marked as chrysonyms? Agnesiella aino Matsumura, 1931 is nomen nudum. I do not see the status of the name.

[proceps]

Alnetoidia ((Alnella)) sudzhuchenica [sic] Anufriev, 1971 Double parentheses could be introduced in export, I do not see this in the original DB.

[proceps]

For the "[sic]", do you export nomenclatural statuses? If you do, [sic] should be removed from the name, but I did not see any status on nomen nudum.

[mdoering]

is [sic] only used for nomen nudum? There is no dedicated status "nomen nudum" in ColDP, but you can still place it under Name.status and it will get interpreted as an unavailable name.

[mdoering]

Well, I am not sure how incertae sedis are treated in CoL now.

we simply leave out the missing ranks and attach the name to the next known higher parent. So you would do assign the parent of A. nagalandi to be Typhlocybinae.

[proceps]

in TW A. nagalandi has Typhlocybinae as parent, that is why you are probably do not have it in the migration, because the migration started from the genus.

[proceps]

No [sic] is not assigned to nomen nudum. It is attached to misspelling. I just mentioned to examples of nomenclatural status in TW, which I do not see in CoL. Seeing unavailable status would be enough for me.

[mdoering]

http://api.catalogue.life/vocab/nomstatus