Open yroskov opened 4 months ago
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
@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.
@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.
Unparsable authorship, those probably have strange characters in the original DB: Megaselia neocorynurae González, Brown & Ospina, 2002
Unusual Name Characters, 28: incomplete trinomial names like Sargus infuscatus var. -- This looks like the parser error. The name is complete in TW.
Inconsistent Name, 840: incomplete trinomial names like Aedes subsp. holocinctus Edwards, 1941 --- Incomplete data in the original DB.
Systema Dipterorum ver. 5.0, 2024-01-08 processed via TW by DD; imported 2024-02-07
Summary of issues for @proceps extracted from the editorial report https://github.com/CatalogueOfLife/testing/issues/127#issuecomment-1934409065