Megastigmus issues

[PJansta]

In production:

Why the Megastigmus colombianus is diplayed in beige frame, even if I click on "valid name Megastigmus colombianus" (right up corner)? Why "taxon_name_relationship" shows M. colombianus as invalid, linked M. colombianus. After publishing of paper Hansson & Pujade 2018 paper it should be valid or not?

On the other hand, Megastigmus asir is probably still invalid, but not with beige frame and listed within valid names, if I display all (only) valid names of Megastigmus.

Probably the same for M. bisulcus Girault, M. indi Girault, M. spenseri Girault. Or does it mean that unavailable name still can be treat as a valid one? M. psyllae do not have author. Can it be considered as valid?

The last thing here: Megastigmus darlingi (Girault, 1940) has two parentheses at the beginning of author name. I tried to fix it, but did not manage to do that. It is from the fact that the protonym has one additional parenthesis at the beginning of author name, I think.

Screenshot or wireframe illustrating the problem or fix

[PJansta]

There is one more:

It does display genus name in left column, if I select "protonym" Megatigmus darlingi (see below)

But if I click on "combination", the genus is not dispalyed (it is tru probably for all combinations). It is just inconvinient, if I want to browse more species name within the same genus and use left collumn to navigate to list of species of the genus. If genus is not display, I need to go to the family and then find the genus again.

Other thing (really the last one): If I let display all possible information (using eye icon) about the given taxon

and then click on other taxa in list, all information has gone and I have to again go to eye icon and select what I want to see again.

Again, it is question how important it is, but if I decide to see from some reason all this information for one taxon, then is high probable that I want to see them for other taxon in the list as well.

[proceps]

Megastigmus colombianus is listed as invalid because it has unavailable status. Check the name with the green check mark. Probably the unavailable should be attached to the name in first line, not the second line.

[proceps]

Megastigmus darlingi (Girault, 1940) (two parentheses) - please check the verbatim author string. If the original genus is provided as a relationship. The Author string should not have parentheses.

[proceps]

Navigation from a Combination. Please just click the valid species name first, and you will get the genus listed in the navigation column.

[PJansta]

@Megastigmus colombianus - yes, I think after the paper Hanson & Pujade-Villar, 2018 it should be listed as a valid name. I will discuss it Matt later.

[PJansta]

@Megastigmus darlingi (Girault, 1940) (two parentheses) - all set, thanks.

[PJansta]

@Navigation from a Combination - yes, it works, I know. Thanks. But I am just wondering why it works with any "protonym" (i.e. dislay the genus in navigation column) and with "combinations". If try for example Megastigmus aculeatus and use one of the protonyms listed there (for examle even Torymus punctum) it shows the genus. If I try any combination, it doesn. It is not super important thing for me, just it makes sense to me stay in the genus navigation, even if I use "only" combination for that genus.

[PJansta]

And please, the Megastigmus asir, M. bisulcus Girault, M. indi Girault, M. spenseri Girault, M. psyllae + eye icon issues? Thanks, Petr

[proceps]

M. asir. There are two protonyms in this case. One of them is listed as unavailable. But the second one (with green check mark) is an available and valid name. It does not have unavailable status. Depending which one you select, you are in valid or invalid presentation.

For eye filter, there are issues already open on GitHub, some people already noticed that this desirable to keep some filter modification. See the issues: https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks/issues/1332 and https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks/issues/1416

[PJansta]

Dmitri, sorry, but it does not make sense to me. Yes, there are even three protonyms. All the same name, two of them with the same reference), one (valid) with no reference (?). How the protonym without any reference can be the valid one. Why the other protonyms (with the same authors are treated as unavailable?

Cheers, Petr

út 2. 6. 2020 v 8:40 odesílatel Dmitry Dmitriev notifications@github.com napsal:

M. asir. There are two protonyms in this case. One of them is listed as unavailable. But the second one (with green check mark) is an available and valid name. It does not have unavailable status. Depending which one you select, you are in valid or invalid presentation.

For eye filter, there are issues already open on GitHub, some people already noticed that this desirable to keep some filter modification. See the issues: SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks#1332 https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks/issues/1332 and SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks#1416 https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks/issues/1416

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/chalcid/jncdb/issues/32#issuecomment-637634197, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AOAH744MNZFMWG23TQ7C423RUUMO7ANCNFSM4NPHYCDA .

-- Dr. Petr Janšta Tel.: +420 221 95 1051 E-mail: petr.jansta@natur.cuni.cz

Katedra zoologie; Přírodovědecká fakulta Univerzita Karlova v Praze Přírodovědecká fakulta Viničná 7, 128 43 Praha 2 www.natur.cuni.cz

Department of Zoology; Faculty of Science Charles University in Prague Faculty of Science Viničná 7, 128 43 Praha 2 www.natur.cuni.cz/en

[proceps]

@PJansta This coming from the migration of the original UCD database. The problem is that the TaxonNames in UCD were linked to each other not by ID, but by the string name. So when there is a string under a valid name in UCD and the string is not matching with valid name a new protonym is created. In most cases those protonyms are converted into new combinations, but in some cases, those protonyms are marked as unavailable or a synonym (in another ucd table). If this was the case those names could not be converted into new combination. The question now if the two names are actually the same, they just have to be merged under a single name. We have an issue open with require a new interface to merge two identical names together.