When searching by common name, multiple entries with the same common name appear in the list, e.g.
a search for: 'Black-poplar'
gives two results. It's impossible for the user to know which entry to pick. This is a problem because the duplicates often relate to taxa at different clade levels (i.e. at species and at sub-species). A user who resorts to using common names almost certainly wants the higher level (species) name - but by chance could choose either. If the wrong name is picked at subspecies level then this becomes a seriously misleading and problematic identification error.
The common name list should be sorted by name and then by scientific name and duplicate common names eliminated from the returned results.
The higher level taxon name should be retained in the case of duplicates.
I'd suggest sorting the common name matches by common name and then by number-of-words in the scientific name - which would be a broadly correct short-cut to returning the higher rank first.
When searching by common name, multiple entries with the same common name appear in the list, e.g.
a search for: 'Black-poplar'
gives two results. It's impossible for the user to know which entry to pick. This is a problem because the duplicates often relate to taxa at different clade levels (i.e. at species and at sub-species). A user who resorts to using common names almost certainly wants the higher level (species) name - but by chance could choose either. If the wrong name is picked at subspecies level then this becomes a seriously misleading and problematic identification error.
The common name list should be sorted by name and then by scientific name and duplicate common names eliminated from the returned results.
The higher level taxon name should be retained in the case of duplicates.
I'd suggest sorting the common name matches by common name and then by number-of-words in the scientific name - which would be a broadly correct short-cut to returning the higher rank first.