Wrong Fungi Chrysididae family

[mdoering]

This dataset contains the hymenoptera family Chrysididae twice:

https://www.checklistbank.org/dataset/33631/names?facet=rank&facet=issue&facet=status&facet=nomStatus&facet=nameType&facet=field&facet=authorship&facet=authorshipYear&facet=extinct&facet=environment&facet=origin&limit=50&offset=0&q=Chrysididae&rank=family&status=accepted&status=provisionally%20accepted

Once wrongly under Fungi.

https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/summary/FF9BFFE80C65E621D1255343631D483B

[mdoering]

Same problem here: https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/summary/FF9EFF935938FF8EFF4DFFEBFFAEFF82

https://www.checklistbank.org/dataset/34856/names?facet=rank&facet=issue&facet=status&facet=nomStatus&facet=nameType&facet=field&facet=authorship&facet=authorshipYear&facet=extinct&facet=environment&facet=origin&limit=50&offset=0&q=Chrysididae&sortBy=taxonomic

Looking at this dwca there are a few wrongly classified species like the following:

04867375F03A7C9D7DA3E18A2083FB98.taxon Animalia Ascomycota Eurotiomycetes Hymenoptera Chrysididae Stilbum species Stilbum calens (Fabricius 1781) (Fabricius 1781) Stilbum calens Stilbum calens (Fabricius, 1781) Fabricius 1781 https://treatment.plazi.org/id/04867375F03A7C9D7DA3E18A2083FB98

[mdoering]

Where is Ascomycota coming from? I cant find it anywhere in the original publication.

[juwingert]

Hi @mdoering, I'll fix these. I'll be back soon with the information.

[flsimoes]

Where is Ascomycota coming from? I cant find it anywhere in the original publication.

I suspect it came from Checklistbank's end. My guess is that it wrongly filled the gaps in the attributes. For some reason unknown to us, those species you listed didn't have attributes for Phylum and Class.

We're trying to fix it in our end by adding the correct attributes, please bear with us a little longer.

[mdoering]

That reminds me we should properly discuss whether adding external classifications from COL,GBIF or others really is useful. I would prefer if we only had data found in the publication and not sth interpreted from elsewhere. We are feeding a circular pathway from Plazi to Col back to Plazi. The classification could be used at Plazi to organise data, but maybe we should not use it in the dwc archives at all.

On the other hand some taxonomic context is very much needed. But that might better reside in the dataset metadata and apply to all treatments in an article?

[juwingert]

Hi, the problem was fixed. Cheers