Match to GBIF backbone of taxon in checklist different than result species matching tool

[damianooldoni]

Within the RIPARIAS target species list we published this species, Zizania latifolia along with its vernacular names in English, Dutch and French. As you can see by clicking on "VIEW ON GBIF BACKBONE" button, this taxon is linked to Zizania latifolia (Griseb.) Stapf (taxonomic status: DOUBTFUL), which has the very same vernacular name(s).

However, if I run a species match via Species matching tool or via rgbif::name_backbone(name = "Zizania latifolia") in R, I get a link to Zizania latifolia (Griseb.) Hance ex F.Muell. (taxonomic status: ACCEPTED).

Is the indexing of all checklists against the Backbone maybe ongoing and so is it just a question of time? Or the problem is due to the fact that the GBIF checklist publication process takes into account the match of the vernacular names as well, which I thought it was not the case?

Thanks!

[damianooldoni]

I checked a little further. I think it's not a problem of indexing the checklist to the backbone as this "mismatch" was probably present already few months ago. Maybe a different matching script as supposed by @peterdesmet?

[ManonGros]

perhaps this is a question for @mdoering or @thomasstjerne ?

[mdoering]

There are subtle differences how the matching works for occurrences (=public matching) & checklists. That is likely the cause of the different results

[damianooldoni]

Thanks @mdoering. Is there a tool to get in advance the GBIF Backbone match for checklists? Which workflow do you suggest?

[mdoering]

Im afraid this is not exposed in our API. The closest is to use the "occurrence" matching in strict mode, but it's not gonna give you exactly the same results I am afraid. I will keep that in mind for the future to expose such services, but it's nothing we can easily change soon. In fact the exposed matching service does a better job in your case, it should have preferred the accepted name to the doubtful one.

[damianooldoni]

Thanks!