search

gbif / backbone-feedback

2 stars 0 forks source link

Agama annectans has no subspecies with the name "error" #386

Open gbif-portal opened 2 years ago

gbif-portal commented 2 years ago

Agama annectans has no subspecies with the name "error"

The IUCN record states that the form "annectans" in Blanford's original publication is a orthographic error.

User: See in registry System: Firefox 92.0.0 / Ubuntu 0.0.0 Referer: https://www.gbif.org/species/10909233 Window size: width 1208 - height 912 API log&_a=(columns:!(_source),filters:!(),index:'3390a910-fcda-11ea-a9ab-4375f2a9d11c',interval:auto,query:(language:kuery,query:''),sort:!())) Site log&_a=(columns:!(_source),filters:!(),index:'5c73f360-fce3-11ea-a9ab-4375f2a9d11c',interval:auto,query:(language:kuery,query:''),sort:!())) System health at time of feedback: WARNING

ahahn-gbif commented 2 years ago

The reference taxon linked to from the species page ( https://www.gbif.org/species/10909233 --> https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/170363/20518757) now gives the currently accepted name, Acanthocercus annectens. The name received from the source dataset (IUCN: https://www.gbif.org/species/176719090/verbatim) reads "Agama annectans Blanford, 1870 [orth. error]", which leads to the faulty interpretation.

mdoering commented 2 years ago

Somehow the IUCN synonym Agama annectans Blanford, 1870 [orth. error] get's parsed incorrectly into a subspecies:

https://www.gbif.org/species/176719090/verbatim

mdoering commented 2 years ago

see https://github.com/gbif/name-parser/issues/82